4 ms·
This supposes Hume was a great philosopher, and that skepticism is an admirable philosophical position. These are questionable suppositions.
by JacksonGariety 5y ago
This supposes Hume was a great philosopher, and that skepticism is an admirable philosophical position. These are questionable suppositions.
- ggm 5y agoCites?
- planet-and-halo 5y agoHappily, Hume himself would probably agree with you! The guy was even skeptical of his own skepticism.
- sitkack 5y agoIsn't that a lousy move? Doesn't it make the entire theory a tautology that cannot be attacked?
- planet-and-halo 5y agoEpoché
- MispelledToyota 5y agoif it's tautological then there's no reason to attack it. It's merely uninteresting. If people still think they don't like it than the critique would have to something else.
- sitkack 5y agoGödel showed that everything is tautological if you go low enough, but invoking it against yourself feels like an automatic point for the other side. I am not invoking it, of course it is uninteresting. In a sport amongst friends with good intent it should be a suggestion to stay within bounds and satisfy the spirit of the game.
- MispelledToyota 5y agoIf Hume isn't a great philosopher, then it's because the category isn't coherent. Any reasonable understanding of great philosopher would include him. In terms of importance, scope, originality, argumentation, he's among the greats. If skepticism isn't admirable, I'll have to ask you to behave in a less disreputable manner.
- goatlover 5y agoThe problem of induction remains an outstanding problem. Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary proof. And moral realism remains contentious. There's justification for at least some of Hume's skepticism.