Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The god scenario versus the game scenario

Page 1 of 2 [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Aug 2009, 10:45 am

Sand wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

What the hell! It makes as much sense as Christianity.


Rene Descartes thought otherwise.

ruveyn


I was never aware that Rene Descartes played video games.


He played the philosophical equivalent thereof as did Kant.See -Discourse on Method- (1637).. I Kant essentially proposed that we are all born with Virtual Reality Goggles that we can not remove. See -Critique of Pure Reason-.

Once you get past some of the superficial matters, you will see that many of our ideas have be knocking about for thousands of years. Just about every epistemological approach possible was dealt with by Plato. See -The Republc- -Theatatus- and -Timeaus-. Its all there. Bertrand Russell once wrote that every work in philosophy is a footnote to or a gloss on the works of Plato.

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

11 Aug 2009, 11:00 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

What the hell! It makes as much sense as Christianity.


Rene Descartes thought otherwise.

ruveyn


I was never aware that Rene Descartes played video games.


He played the philosophical equivalent thereof as did Kant.See -Discourse on Method- (1637).. I Kant essentially proposed that we are all born with Virtual Reality Goggles that we can not remove. See -Critique of Pure Reason-.

Once you get past some of the superficial matters, you will see that many of our ideas have be knocking about for thousands of years. Just about every epistemological approach possible was dealt with by Plato. See -The Republc- -Theatatus- and -Timeaus-. Its all there. Bertrand Russell once wrote that every work in philosophy is a footnote to or a gloss on the works of Plato.

ruveyn


Mentioning authorities does not answer my query.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Aug 2009, 11:07 am

Sand wrote:

Mentioning authorities does not answer my query.


You point has been discussed for thousands of years. It is still not resolved.

I mention these philosophical sources as historic reference. I do not buy Plato's approach for a single second. Plato begat Aristotle whom Hobbes and Hume denied. The soundest philosophy has been put forth by Hobbes, Hume and more recently, Popper.

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

11 Aug 2009, 11:13 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

Mentioning authorities does not answer my query.


You point has been discussed for thousands of years. It is still not resolved.

I mention these philosophical sources as historic reference. I do not buy Plato's approach for a single second. Plato begat Aristotle whom Hobbes and Hume denied. The soundest philosophy has been put forth by Hobbes, Hume and more recently, Popper.

ruveyn


My "point" was that here are alternatives to the theological structure proposed by Jewish and Christian and some other theologies. Your point seems to be that others had the same thought. That's OK with me but it's irrelevant.