4 ms·
But not every appeal to logic comes from malicious philosophers. Most do not. So, in practice, you get a lot of lazy dismissals in service of selfish desires.
by elefanten 4y ago
But not every appeal to logic comes from malicious philosophers. Most do not.
So, in practice, you get a lot of lazy dismissals in service of selfish desires.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago> But not every appeal to logic comes from malicious philosophers. Most do not. Whether it comes from a malicious philosopher or somebody who means well but is confused, it is generally prudent to consider whether the discussion is actually worth your time. I haven't met many philosophers actually pitching Zeno's paradoxes at people, but some I've encountered recently for real: reasons why Jesus is the means to salvation, why the Earth is flat, and why we're probably living in a simulation. I brush these aside without giving them serious responses, because I selfishly want to spend my time in other ways.
- conqueso 4y agoThat's not selfish - we only have so much time. The expectation that one should engage with everybody all the time will lead to misery. It's totally okay to say " no thanks, have a nice day" Edit: I realize your pointing out the prudence of an upfront decision of whether or not to engage means we probably agree here, I just consider the word selfish to be a bit harsh
- bobthechef 4y ago
- brobdingnagians 4y agoSometimes it is a quick occlusion algorithm; if we spent time evaluating every proposal we encountered, we would never get much done. Being able to quickly remove some arguments that our brain can quickly exclude (even when sometimes incorrectly) is a dramatic optimization. The key is training our brain to do it (mostly) correctly, like some kind of truth Bloom filter.
- giraffe_lady 4y agoIn my experience they kinda do.