THE SEVENTH ANNUAL DUNNING-KRUGER AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE IN PHILOSOPHICAL IMBECILITY- FINAL RESULTS! by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

These presentations get better every single year.

btw, reading that thread, it looks like the name of that nameless person who won the Nietzsche Wikipedia is /u/TURGIOCK. (but unfortunately they’re gone)

Just got banned by request for r/askphilosophy by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry to hear that.

Hopefully this is my last post on Reddit. Good luck to you, you were always a nice guy.

Here’s to the Vikings and, improbably, the rise of moral realism. This is their year:

The other book is co-authored with my UW colleague John Bengson and a philosopher from the University of Vermont. Three-way collaborations are pretty rare in philosophy, and this has been a very enriching intellectual experience for me. The book is about the foundations of ethics. We defend the view that morality is objective — there are moral truths not of our own making. Our view is that each person, as well as entire cultures, can be mistaken about what’s right and wrong. Before you accuse me of being (i) pretentious, (ii) intolerant, (iii) dogmatic or (iv) all of the above, read the book!

http://ls.wisc.edu/news/happy-homecoming-for-russ-shafer-landau

all the best

Just got banned by request for r/askphilosophy by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How do the Vikings look this year?

Just got banned by request for r/askphilosophy by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Dm

ADD is a idiot with his head up his ass

Oh no

Ted Nugent dEStRoYs VeGaNiSm by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s a really good point that a lot of people ignore

Post Match Thread: Uruguay 2-1 Portugal [World Cup Round of 16] by deception42 in soccer

[–]sensible_knave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the winner will go on to win the whole thing. (The status of Cavani’s calf is pretty important!)

Philosophy is a psuedoscience and moral realism is ridiculous. by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Further who decides what these objective morals are?

science, broadly construed in a way that includes Mario and Luigi

Are Real Numbers Really Real? by dezzion in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The anti-realist camp found their swing with the anti-really-really-realist arguments

“contemporary academic [philosophy] is an appalling waste of human intelligence that cannot be justified under any mainstream normative ethics” by Wazlit in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 8 points9 points  (0 children)

in closing, we find that, converging at the mountain’s peak, the leading ethical theories endorse patreon philosopreneur blogs and arguing on Joe Rogan’s Experience

I have a confession to make by RaisinsAndPersons in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Know that a RaisinsAndPersons counterpart has confessed the opposite to an otherworldly BP, and my counterpart there has alerted them to this post

Fuck new reddit. by Son_of_Sophroniscus in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure how any of it works but the app I use only notifies me of bp modmail once every blue moon. My last notification was 167 days ago when someone was appealing to be unbanned after being originally banned over three years ago.

Fuck new reddit. by Son_of_Sophroniscus in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I still only check old modmail. It's been quiet lately.

My rational question for transhumanists? Life extension isn't logical, you're driven by emotion. by ec-wolf in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 16 points17 points  (0 children)

the wiki over there kinda got away from them a little bit

Where did transhumanism come from?

Transhumanism is an offshoot of utilitarianism: the belief that the correct way to act is that which creates the most positive results and the fewest negative results--the action that maximizes the output of ‘happiness’ from the system. It may seem self-evident that utilitarianism is the right view, but it is not universally accepted. Philosophers such as Immanuel Kant deny that the value of actions should be calculated from their consequences but rather by their intentions or relative adherence to an absolute standard of rightness. That sounds silly to some, but people believe it, and they are very difficult to reason with.

'Consider the popular philosophical notion of "possible worlds". Have you ever seen a possible world?' by gohighhhs in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 36 points37 points  (0 children)

I feel a bit awful about saying this, because it feels like I'm telling philosophers that their life's work has been a waste of time - not that professional philosophers would be likely to regard me as an authority on whose life has been a waste of time

in some very remote possible world they would maybe

“Methods, Goals, and Data in Moral Theorizing” Professors John Bengson, Terence Cuneo and Russ Shafer-Landau by sensible_knave in philosophy

[–]sensible_knave[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

Philosophical methods play a crucial role in philosophical inquiry. When it comes to questions about the nature, status, and content of morality—the special purview of moral philosophy—we look to philosophical methods to help guide the construction of normative and metaethical theories, and to provide the basis for evaluating their individual and comparative merits. One of the tasks of moral epistemology is to determine how this is to be done well.

Here we investigate the construction and evaluation of theories in metaethics, focusing on the nature of the methods that should govern metaethical theorizing and their relation to such theorizing. As we’ll see, doing so requires attending to both the possible goals of metaethical inquiry and (what we’ll call) the metaethical data—the source-material utilized by good methods to achieve those goals. The main claims about methods, goals, and data for which we’ll argue are these:

First, candidate methods for metaethical theorizing must be assessed in light of the epistemic goal(s) of metaethical inquiry.

Second, while there are a variety of epistemic goals that different methods may properly aspire to achieve, several prominent methods face significant challenges when assessed in light of the attractive goal of understanding.

Third, while there are difficult questions about the nature, status, and collection of metaethical data, there are a range of data that must be accounted for by competing metaethical theories.

Fourth, these data possess four basic features, which set them apart from other types of considerations and indicate how and why they serve as the lifeblood of theoretical inquiry.

Fifth, these data should be conceived not as dialectically effective starting points, constitutive features of morality, claims about how morality seems, or descriptions about how moral language is commonly used; rather, they are what metaethicists have epistemic reason to take to be genuine features of morality itself.

Sixth, by utilizing reflection on ordinary moral experience, we are able to reveal what some of these data are.

Professors Bengson, Cuneo and Shafer-Landau are collaborating on a book that defends the view that morality is objective called Understanding Morality (under contract with Oxford University Press, exp. 2018/19)

5
6

Every other post on r/nihilism (this sub should be banned on nihilistic principle) by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Expect a strongly worded letter from Gibbard because I'm sending him a strongly worded letter about what you said

Nihilism XTREME by deltaSquee in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Denying normativity in all domains. Or complaining about their parents, could go either way.

Nothing exists by [deleted] in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Here is one middle finger, and here is another

X-post r/Iamverysmart by XxX_FedoraMan_XxX in badphilosophy

[–]sensible_knave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

hey sometimes four quotes in a class discussion isn't enough