Philosophy dumber than "radiation is evil"

[Utsanomiko]

Jesus Q. Christ. I know I kept telling myself to never assume I've heard the most idiotic argument in class untill the whole semester is over, but just less than an hour ago in my weekly Philosophy in Human Nature discussion session, I had the misfortune to hear one to top the most memorable stupid remark from Intro to Philosophy last term.

Ok, we were discussing the agrugments brought up by Socrates in Plato's Phaedo that attempted to prove that the soul exists and survives outside the body. One main point for the Argument from Recollection is that 'since we have knowledge of the Forms (knowledge of things such as perfection, absolute beauty, perfect justice, etc. things we supposedly cannot learn from observing our flawed world), we must carry them from a previous existence, which is from an undying soul'. Our professor had already gone point-by-point on why each argument brought up was basically crap in the Lecture earlier this week, but this was the discussion session, and we were suppoed to go over it ourselves (which is odd, since as far as I can tell, in a Philosophy class of 25-30 people, only 5-7 will ever speak in class[/i]).

Anywho, so either I or the guy next to me (who last week shared with me the interesting idea that 'philosophy should only be discussed among people of equal intelligence.' Too true.) mentioned a point that our Professor had brought up; that infants and small children do not exibit signs of understanding these Forms, and instead take years to develop an ability to compare imperfect things to perfect things. So this girl in the back row makes some wierd remark about infants making the choice between bottle teets to prefer ones more like a human nipple (how the fuck does that relate to the Forms, unless 'The Good' and 'The Just' are accompanied by 'The Nipple'? Sure, I like to think that my love of breasts is about a universal quality, but being a Form is a pretty big stretch).

So someone across the room mentions biology, I add to that by saying it's an instinctive reaction, and the guy next to me says it's something that simply developes over time due to natural selection and evolution. So what does she reply with? "Yeah, but where does that instinct come from?"
We repeat and reemphasize that it's merely an instinctive behavior that has developed through the process of natural selection, and the guy next to me and I share some remakes about infant motor development; how despite that after birth they cannot distinguish/identify their limbs, yet they know how to move them and thrash around, via instincts.

So, what does this dingbat in the backrow retort with?
"Yeah, but where does that instinct develop from?"


I simply turn around, look at her as if... well, as if she said what she just did, and say "What are you talking about? The process it develops from is the process of natural selection! We're not talking about magic or something here!"

The rest of the room went into some mumbling and whispered remarks, and the TA got the class back on track to the next points in the argument.

Wally shit, am I the only person who thinks 'not knowing how instincts develop' and 'graduating from highschool' are conflicting concepts? I am becoming convinced that the only thing philosophers are worse at than making valid arguments is discussing philosophy. The only people I know who can actually discuss philosphy admit they despise the subject.

[Ghost Rider]

Ah philosophy...and why I hated it.

It can be fun but at times you really have to wonder...

And your last staement sometimes to be proven far more true then not from many of my peers.

[Montcalm]

By curiosity is she blond?

[Utsanomiko]

Red-head. Had a fairly moronic redhead last semester, as well. But more importantly, they were both empty-heads, it seems.

[Ghost Rider]

Could you stare at her and only think of her naked rather than hear her words?

If not...then I feel sorry for you because while it doesn't help...staring at a good looking dummy babbling at times is at least fun.

[Utsanomiko]

Well, one: she was kinda plain. this was more of one of those pseudo-intellectual flower children than a ditzy dame, if anything. Second, I really depend on intelligence to perk my interest. As soon as tehy open their mouth and nothing notable comes out, Mr. Happy goes back into his house.

[Ghost Rider]

Gah not much and dumb....I feel your pain.

Yeah I need intelligence...but usually I can just let most of my mind drift as the dumb ones try....sometimes it's fun.

But if not much persay and spouting of some of that tripe...nope...that's a person you destroy with logic and have them flee to their own little cave.

[Durandal]

Reminds me of my critical thinking course in freshman year, taught by a psychology professor who I got into an argument with. We were covering creationism and evolution.

ME: Evolution is an observed fact and not subject to debate. Why don't you just say that gravity doesn't exist because Newton's theories regarding it may have been flawed?
HER: Well, I don't know if it's considered a scientific fact yet. I think it's still just a theory.
ME: No, it's a fact. That's how theories start. That's how science works. The theory part is the mechanisms driving it. We've observed evolution taking place; it's a fact.

I don't think she heard the last part though. She'd already moved on so that I wouldn't make her look like a scientific ignoramous when she was supposed to have a Ph.D. in something which claims to be a science.

[DPDarkPrimus]

I dispise philosphy, Utsano. Remember why I mentioned I wanted to be a philospher to you before?

So that I could simply make my normal cynical observations on the world, but that then people would consider them for a moment, instead of trying to shoot me down.

[Frank Hipper]

Reminds me of an argument made at the GP4 Teens forum, "If we came from monkeys, who created the monkeys?"

I'm tempted to market the Hipper brand portable sterilization device for people like this. A palm sixed micro-wave emitter that you wave in front of the subjects crotch. Voila, bye-bye viable eggs 'n sperm.





(Don't jump my shit, of course I know it would never work, just let a guy dream, OK?)

[Utsanomiko]

I actually considered as a kid building a mocrowave gun out of a car battery, an old 700W oven, and a beat-up rifle stock. Like most of my plans, it didn't get off the ground.

Speaking of not getting off the ground, it's almost funny how fucking clever these morons think they are for asking these questions, as if they're the first assclown in history to have ever looked once step beyond the layman's summary statement.

[Frank_Scenario]

A lot of colleges require some sort of philosophy or ethics class for all sutdents. Although I am a philosophy student, I don't think this is a good idea, because most students are not prepared to engage in the process of philosophy - which includes study of logic, argumentation, and just general reasoning ability. The reason that students are not prepared is because of crappy public education in high school and earlier - every child should be taught logic and critical thinking as a core part of the curriculum from the moment they enter the school system.

Since that doesn't happen, you get people who don't contribute to a class and/or those who only contribute steaming piles of crap.

Aside - Plato's not particularly worthwhile philosophy. I'm sure there are some neo-Platonists out there, but most have rejected him. Plato is still a good thing to study, though because of his contributions to the history of philosophy.

[Durandal]

A good chunk of the philosophy I've seen just makes me wonder, "Who gives a fuck?" Critical reasoning and philosophy are not the same thing. Students should be required to take critical thinking courses. They should not be required to take philosophy courses.

[Frank_Scenario]

A good chunk of the philosophy I've seen just makes me wonder, "Who gives a fuck?" Critical reasoning and philosophy are not the same thing. Students should be required to take critical thinking courses. They should not be required to take philosophy courses.

I'd have no problem with requiring philosophy courses at the college level if students were educated in critical thinking and logic beforehand. Done properly, philosophy is an expression of critical thinking, and a valuable exercise.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Jesus Q. Christ.

Is she hot? Perhaps she can compensate for hurting your brain by soothing your penis.

[Durandal]

A good chunk of the philosophy I've seen just makes me wonder, "Who gives a fuck?" Critical reasoning and philosophy are not the same thing. Students should be required to take critical thinking courses. They should not be required to take philosophy courses.

I'd have no problem with requiring philosophy courses at the college level if students were educated in critical thinking and logic beforehand. Done properly, philosophy is an expression of critical thinking, and a valuable exercise.

The sad truth is that most people are dumber than fence posts when it comes to any kind of critical thinking, and they'll never learn to become better critical thinkers. Most of the time, the presence of morons in a philosophy class detracts from the overall experience and makes it a waste of time for the precious few who actually know what they're talking about.

[Utsanomiko]

Jesus Q. Christ.

Is she hot? Perhaps she can compensate for hurting your brain by soothing your penis.

Did you even read my response to Ghost Rider? My penis cannot be soothed by stupidity. That's not how I play the game, end of story.

[Darth Wong]

The sad truth is that most people are dumber than fence posts when it comes to any kind of critical thinking, and they'll never learn to become better critical thinkers. Most of the time, the presence of morons in a philosophy class detracts from the overall experience and makes it a waste of time for the precious few who actually know what they're talking about.

All philosophers should be required to learn the fundamental principles of science before they start going into philosophy, so they have some grounding in modes of thought which actually work.

Mother Nature is a far more strict judge of logically valid methods than any Philosophy professor. That is the lesson scientists must understand, which engineers are FORCED to understand, and which 90% of the average philosophy class doesn't fucking understand at all.

[Utsanomiko]

The sad thing is the class TA didn't seem to understand it either. He was quick to generalize science, wanting to make it seem like the two fields have worked the same way for the last millenia, despite admitting that science has made so many advancements, and philosophy is still going over 1000-year old arguments, getting little work done, and admitting that 90% of it is crap that goes nowhere. "Well, scientists sometimes come up with a conclusion and then find observations to fit, as well." is one of his justifications. I simply replied "not any good ones", and he quieted down,

[Durandal]

The sad thing is the class TA didn't seem to understand it either. He was quick to generalize science, wanting to make it seem like the two fields have worked the same way for the last millenia, despite admitting that science has made so many advancements, and philosophy is still going over 1000-year old arguments, getting little work done, and admitting that 90% of it is crap that goes nowhere. "Well, scientists sometimes come up with a conclusion and then find observations to fit, as well." is one of his justifications. I simply replied "not any good ones", and he quieted down,

Ask him if he could possibly explain the scientific method. Once he says no or fails miserably, tell him he has no place commenting on how science works. He'll likely not mention Occam's Razor, fuck up the definition of theory, and tell you that a law is a theory which has been proven.

[Grog]

who thinks that radiation is evil???

[Kelly Antilles]

Here's what you SHOULD have said....

"Behind the preposition 'from', ya bitch."

Sorry, ending sentences in prepositions is one of my pet peeves.

[Robert Treder]

Here's what you SHOULD have said....

"Behind the preposition 'from', ya bitch."

Sorry, ending sentences in prepositions is one of my pet peeves.

This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.

[Utsanomiko]

Ask him if he could possibly explain the scientific method. Once he says no or fails miserably, tell him he has no place commenting on how science works. He'll likely not mention Occam's Razor, fuck up the definition of theory, and tell you that a law is a theory which has been proven.

I was reffering to my Philosophy teacher last hear, but this TA seems to be the same way almost. He didn't get why, after letting the class argue semantics over what 'people' and 'born' meant in the sentence "It is a Necessary Cause that person has to have been born to be alive", I said we'd never get any of therms labeled as Necessary or Sufficient if we kept fudging and undermining their meanings. Apparently, he thought it was perfectly normal to only classify 2 out of 10 as one or the other, when we never had any shit like that in Principles of Reasoning when we covered the same subject.

I'm only hoping I dont have more horror stories to share for this class that can top the "Couldn't radiation be a form of natural evil?" incident. Futile, but I can still dream.

[xianseeker]

At the risk of being flamed (I'm wearing my flame retardant jammies!), I'm going to state that, on the whole, scientists make bad philosophers of science. One of the greatest out there, Hawking, describes himself as a positivist, a philosophy that has been abandoned by most philosophers.

With the exception of the post-modernists, most philosophers have excellent definitions of theory, hold to occam's razor, and never assert absolute certaintly, such as saying a law is a proven theory.