3 ms·

>My intent is for more people here to broaden their perspective. I see very strong signals have people been anchored in computer science but not philosophy or e

>My intent is for more people here to broaden their perspective. I see very strong signals have people been anchored in computer science but not philosophy or ethics or history. I see common tendencies for people to dig in. It is easier to defend oneself than to learn. My nickname is an amalgamation of my two favorite thinkers: Ludwig Wittgenstein and Nagasena. They are from different time periods (20th century AD and 1st century BC) and philosophical traditions (Western philosophy and Buddhism). Both have very interesting philosophies especially in regards to linguistics. If you think that analyzing language won't get us anywhere, I highly suggest to read both of them.

xpe 4y ago
Thanks for sharing that. > If you think that analyzing language won't get us anywhere, I highly suggest to read both of them. I agree that analyzing language is useful.
xpe 4y ago
Wikipedia's account of Wittgenstein and the Cambridge Moral Sciences Club seems quite telling about his personal attributes: > In 1912 Wittgenstein joined the Cambridge Moral Sciences Club, an influential discussion group for philosophy dons and students, delivering his first paper there on 29 November that year, a four-minute talk defining philosophy as "all those primitive propositions which are assumed as true without proof by the various sciences." He dominated the society and for a time would stop attending in the early 1930s after complaints that he gave no one else a chance to speak. ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein#Cambridge_Moral_Sciences_Club_and_Apostles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein#Cambridge_... > ... The club became infamous within popular philosophy because of a meeting on 25 October 1946 at Richard Braithwaite's rooms in King's College, Cambridge, where Karl Popper, another Viennese philosopher, had been invited as the guest speaker. Popper's paper was "Are there philosophical problems?", in which he struck up a position against Wittgenstein's, contending that problems in philosophy are real, not just linguistic puzzles as Wittgenstein argued. Accounts vary as to what happened next, but Wittgenstein apparently started waving a hot poker, demanding that Popper give him an example of a moral rule. Popper offered one – "Not to threaten visiting speakers with pokers" – at which point Russell told Wittgenstein he had misunderstood and Wittgenstein left. Popper maintained that Wittgenstein "stormed out", but it had become accepted practice for him to leave early (because of his aforementioned ability to dominate discussion). It was the only time the philosophers, three of the most eminent in the world, were ever in the same room together.

xpe 4y ago

Thanks for sharing that. > If you think that analyzing language won't get us anywhere, I highly suggest to read both of them. I agree that analyzing language is useful.

xpe 4y ago

Wikipedia's account of Wittgenstein and the Cambridge Moral Sciences Club seems quite telling about his personal attributes: > In 1912 Wittgenstein joined the Cambridge Moral Sciences Club, an influential discussion group for philosophy dons and students, delivering his first paper there on 29 November that year, a four-minute talk defining philosophy as "all those primitive propositions which are assumed as true without proof by the various sciences." He dominated the society and for a time would stop attending in the early 1930s after complaints that he gave no one else a chance to speak. ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein#Cambridge_Moral_Sciences_Club_and_Apostles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein#Cambridge_... > ... The club became infamous within popular philosophy because of a meeting on 25 October 1946 at Richard Braithwaite's rooms in King's College, Cambridge, where Karl Popper, another Viennese philosopher, had been invited as the guest speaker. Popper's paper was "Are there philosophical problems?", in which he struck up a position against Wittgenstein's, contending that problems in philosophy are real, not just linguistic puzzles as Wittgenstein argued. Accounts vary as to what happened next, but Wittgenstein apparently started waving a hot poker, demanding that Popper give him an example of a moral rule. Popper offered one – "Not to threaten visiting speakers with pokers" – at which point Russell told Wittgenstein he had misunderstood and Wittgenstein left. Popper maintained that Wittgenstein "stormed out", but it had become accepted practice for him to leave early (because of his aforementioned ability to dominate discussion). It was the only time the philosophers, three of the most eminent in the world, were ever in the same room together.