epekeinatēsousias

PhD student

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

tucking myself into bed so i can become an undercover agent

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

@OrthodoxOrigen Very interesting question. I answer “yes” in the trivial sense that we are always in the “non-truth” era. The age of Plato was just as “non-truth” as today, as is evinced by how preoccupied he was with this very subject. Truth is not at home among human beings, nor within history

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

It involves such a bizarre oscillation between radical anti-skepticism (e.g. the consciousness of other beings, including bats, is fully available to us through neuroscience) and radical skepticism (every qualitative experience is an illusion, a non-reality).

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

It’s difficult to imagine a philosophy less convincing than Frankish’s illusionism. Perfect example of falling so deeply in love with a formalism (scientistic physicalism) that one is willing to literally disregard reality itself as an inconvenient theoretical inconsistency.

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

Don’t have many strong thoughts apart from the cowardly, though albeit understandable, decision not to translate λόγος. The refusal to translate is not a translation. No escaping the masochism of translating it, as sympathetic as I am to its difficulty. “Articulation” isn’t bad.

[Darpos @energeiologian]

If you are inclined towards philosophical theology and somewhat disenchanted by the Bible's *apparent* lack of speculative richness, I suggest you read DBH's translation of the NT (Especially John, Paul and Peter).

It clears up the onto-cosmological insights of Scripture

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

Context is often necessary to exhaustively understand the content of any work. But it is immensely important to also appreciate a work wholly on its own phenomenological terms at some point and thereby to appreciate what’s universal and immortal about its character.

[Sami Gold @souljagoyteller]

I can’t understand how people who supposedly love the Great Books have no desire to contextualize them. Don’t you believe that putting them in their historical place only enriches the capacity for the works’ appreciation?

[ICE T @FINALLEVEL]

ICE COLD FACT 💎

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

@OrthodoxOrigen Yes good! It really is a truth as obvious as it is significant, and which bears repeating! I can’t think of a more important yet simple fact which undermines physicalism. Only a mind prejudiced by the dogma of naturalist physicalism could convince themself of its erroneousness.

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

🟩 Platonism
🟩 Aristotelianism
🟥 Epicureanism
🟨 Stoicism
🟨 Skepticism (ancient)
🟩 Thomism
🟨 Rationalism (modern)
🟨 Empiricism (modern)
🟨 Kantianism
🟩 German idealism
🟥 Pragmatism
🟥 Logical positivism
🟥 Existentialism
🟨 Post-structuralism

[William O’Brien @No5mallf3at]

My opinions on philosophies.
🟨 Platonism
🟩 Aristotelianism
🟥 Epicureanism
🟨 Thomism
🟩 Continental rationalism
🟨 British Empiricism
🟩 Kantianism
🟩 German idealism
🟨 Marxism
🟩 Pragmatism
🟥 Logical positivism
🟥 Existentialism
🟥 Post-structuralism

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

@Your_Wrongest @Philip_Goff There are objective facts about subjective states. It is like something to be a bat, and it is like something to be you. It is stance-independently true that you possess certain subjective states.

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

Thomas Nagel is the greatest living analytic philosopher.

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

@JoshuaLWatson being not by will but by nature." 1.2.2

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

@JoshuaLWatson injustice cannot be arbitrarious things, that may be applicable by will indifferently to any actions or dispositions whatsoever. For the modes of all subsistent beings, and the relations of things to one another, are immutable and necessarily what they are, and not arbitrary, ...

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

No science explains what sameness and difference are, what quantity and quality are, what relation is, what cause and effect are. One may not care about robust explanations for any of these things, but then one simply doesn’t care about explaining the world.

[epekeinatēsousias @hatrickpall]

To claim that physics explains the world exhaustively already presupposes an ontology, presupposes what the world is, namely the behaviors and regularities of energy states. There are many good challenges to this view.

[Institute of Art and Ideas @IAI_TV]

Has metaphysics become redundant?

Philosopher of science Massimo Pigliucci proposes that in an age of flourishing science, metaphysics is no longer a necessary area of study.

Tap here to watch his full interview on stoicism, pseudoscience, and metaphysics. https://t.co/2HMgqDQCA4