Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    You don't change the world by ignoring reality and doing stupid **** that won't work.
    We make reality... Reality isn't real, my reality isn't the same as yours so who's reality am I ignoring? And how do you know it (whatever 'it' is) won't work?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    We make reality... Reality isn't real, my reality isn't the same as yours so who's reality am I ignoring? And how do you know it (whatever 'it' is) won't work?
    But we don't make reality. That's exactly the sort of rhetoric the Green Party comes out with.

    We don't make reality at all, we just have to work with it. Pretending otherwise leads to policies that won't work in the real world.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doctorwhofan98)
    I like the Green Party's policies and I used to be a member, but I ultimately quit, and joined Labour, for two key reasons. Firstly, they seemingly don't know how to implement their policies - if they gained over 326 seats in Parliament, could they fully implement all of their promises? I doubt it. Most of their points are ideal, from the economy to a lack of the monarchy, but they seem to fit into the role of a pressure group (pointing out ideal end results to others) rather than a political party. Secondly, they'll never have much power, mostly due to the nightmarish First Past the Post (I can't believe we still haven't switched to AV+ or STV for general elections), but also due to bad PR, especially recently.

    Ideally, all of the Green's pledges would be a reality - I'd certainly like that to be the case. But it's just not feasible. Maybe one day, if we get STV or other PR, then I'll vote for them. But if I could vote this election, and I voted Green, I'd probably just help the Conservatives win in my seat (Morley and Outwood). Ed Balls will be quite lucky to hang on, and his majority was minor in 2010, and if I voted Green it would be one less vote for him, and more chance of a Conservative win. FPTP really sucks.
    Oh look, another leftie who hates what makes Britain British....... bet you loved Labour destroying the UK, didnt you?
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    But we don't make reality. That's exactly the sort of rhetoric the Green Party comes out with.

    We don't make reality at all, we just have to work with it. Pretending otherwise leads to policies that won't work in the real world.
    Yes... We do, reality is made in the brains and given as you mean social reality and we, the public, make up society so we make reality to suggest different is insane.

    and again, who's 'real world'? What's real for one person isn't for another. The only person I know is real is me. As far as I know the rest of the world is a halucinatuon made by my mind to keep me entertained.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Yes... We do, reality is made in the brains and given as you mean social reality and we, the public, make up society so we make reality to suggest different is insane.

    and again, who's 'real world'? What's real for one person isn't for another. The only person I know is real is me. As far as I know the rest of the world is a halucinatuon made by my mind to keep me entertained.
    How do you know you yourself are real? You don't. Don't try that bull**** hipster stuff man.

    You can have a zero or negative growth economy because no other country would have it and essential it would mean the UK falls behind all other countries. And falls into a very bad economic position.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by reallydontknow)
    How do you know you yourself are real? You don't. Don't try that bull**** hipster stuff man.

    You can have a zero or negative growth economy because no other country would have it and essential it would mean the UK falls behind all other countries. And falls into a very bad economic position.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I can assume I am real on some level because I never become unaware of my existence. Where as you, being on the other side of a computer I only know of your existence when you post thus I cannot know you are real because words on a screen would be easy for a bored mind to create.

    once people stop caring so much about money and realise there are more Importent things then we can.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    I can assume I am real on some level because I never become unaware of my existence. Where as you, being on the other side of a computer I only know of your existence when you post thus I cannot know you are real because words on a screen would be easy for a bored mind to create.

    once people stop caring so much about money and realise there are more Importent things then we can.

    But these are assumptions. You claim you are real, you cannot prove it therefore you are not real. Burden of proof.

    Who are you to say people should care less about money?
    Who are you to dictate what people should and shouldn't care about?
    Who are you to dictate what is and isn't "importent"?

    People can do as they like. If you want to live a broke life then by all means do so, but don't try and force other people to, because some other people (well a lot) like money.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by reallydontknow)
    But these are assumptions. You claim you are real, you cannot prove it therefore you are not real. Burden of proof.

    Who are you to say people should care less about money?
    Who are you to dictate what people should and shouldn't care about?
    Who are you to dictate what is and isn't "importent"?

    People can do as they like. If you want to live a broke life then by all means do so, but don't try and force other people to, because some other people (well a lot) like money.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    They are assumptions that any philosopher would ratify. And yes, all I know is that I am real and you can only know that you are real because what is real is only what is perceived...

    So I take it you worship money and hate you fellow humans:rolleyes:

    people should do what is right and they can't do what they want due to the law, unless you want no laws?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    They are assumptions that any philosopher would ratify. And yes, all I know is that I am real and you can only know that you are real because what is real is only what is perceived...

    So I take it you worship money and hate you fellow humans:rolleyes:

    people should do what is right and they can't do what they want due to the law, unless you want no laws?
    Philosophy is bs, there I said it. It's about as much as a joke in my opinion as psychology.

    I don't worship money. I regularly partake in charity, volunteer and help the homeless, but I'm not gonna work in a society where I'm paid the same as a cleaner. Or something stupid like that.

    Until the point of harming somebody else of course and other boundaries.

    But me buying a Bentley is not hurting you. Sure I may not be helping you but I don't have to.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    They are assumptions that any philosopher would ratify. And yes, all I know is that I am real and you can only know that you are real because what is real is only what is perceived...

    So I take it you worship money and hate you fellow humans:rolleyes:

    people should do what is right and they can't do what they want due to the law, unless you want no laws?
    No. Only post modernist philosophers, who aren't real philosophers.

    Sane analytic philosophers say lets assume the world is the way every medium of human understanding suggests it is (ie, induction/science and deduction/mathematics).
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    No. Only post modernist philosophers, who aren't real philosophers.

    Sane analytic philosophers say lets assume the world is the way every medium of human understanding suggests it is (ie, induction/science and deduction/mathematics).
    But every medium of unman understanding is different to every human. What I think is blue you might think is green.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by reallydontknow)
    Philosophy is bs, there I said it. It's about as much as a joke in my opinion as psychology.

    I don't worship money. I regularly partake in charity, volunteer and help the homeless, but I'm not gonna work in a society where I'm paid the same as a cleaner. Or something stupid like that.

    Until the point of harming somebody else of course and other boundaries.

    But me buying a Bentley is not hurting you. Sure I may not be helping you but I don't have to.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    No, only post modernist/continental philosophy is bs. The more mathematical branches of philosophy provide useful clarification on problems that can't be solved through empirical means.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    No. Only post modernist philosophers, who aren't real philosophers.

    Sane analytic philosophers say lets assume the world is the way every medium of human understanding suggests it is (ie, induction/science and deduction/mathematics).
    Sorry I should have clarified that. I agree.
    Proper philosophers I would say study another subject but use philosophy.

    The ones I mean are useless are ones that use philosophy to study nothing and get nothing as a result. Post modernist essentially yes.



    (Original post by Aph)
    But every medium of unman understanding is different to every human. What I think is blue you might think is green.
    Erm nobody cares what you think is blue and green.

    Blue is a defined term as is green. Nobody cares what you see, it is defined as a specific wavelength of light and has its own colour signature.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    But every medium of unman understanding is different to every human. What I think is blue you might think is green.
    We have systems of knowledge such as science which are verifiable, ie two people can look at that system and come to the same conclusions.

    That system cannot 100% be verified in terms of producing knowledge, but the fact that the knowledge it produces behaves exactly as you'd expect it to assuming it correlated correctly to a fixed reality outside of it renders the assumption that it isn't true utterly irrational.

    I'm sympathetic to skepticism about absolute certainty of knowledge. However, I laugh at the idea that because there's a tiny chance our knowledge might be unreliable, therefore we should ignore it and assume the most unlikely, ridiculous possibility; that reality changes from person to person and doesn't exist. There's no reason to assume that. And to apply it to economic policy?? laughable.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by reallydontknow)
    Erm nobody cares what you think is blue and green.

    Blue is a defined term as is green. Nobody cares what you see, it is defined as a specific wavelength of light and has its own colour signature.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That was simply a mundane example, my point is all my senses are different to everyone else's senses thus all our realities are different.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by reallydontknow)
    Sorry I should have clarified that. I agree.
    Proper philosophers I would say study another subject but use philosophy.

    The ones I mean are useless are ones that use philosophy to study nothing and get nothing as a result. Post modernist essentially yes.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I disagree with the bold. Philosophy is a highly technical, wide and specialized area. It's not some additional caveat to other disciplines, but a huge area of study itself. There have been many mathematician-philosophers in the past true, but with academic specialization as it is this is rare.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    That was simply a mundane example, my point is all my senses are different to everyone else's senses thus all our realities are different.
    Okay so your example was wrong. Yet your pint is still valid, is that your point?

    No my friend. It doesn't work like that, I agree with the person above you. There is a chance that anything is wrong. But that doesn't mean we can discard everything. That's ridiculous.

    Occams razor. Read about it.

    I can say that it will not rain hamburgers and ketchup tomorrow. Now that isn't 100% as these hamburgers could materialise out of nowhere but physics and probability say that they will most likely not. So you can exclude this.

    For arguments like yours razors are the way forward.

    And please stop being such a try hard hipster postmodernist

    (Original post by KingStannis)
    I disagree with the bold. Philosophy is a highly technical, wide and specialized area. It's not some additional caveat to other disciplines, but a huge area of study itself. There have been many mathematician-philosophers in the past true, but with academic specialization as it is this is rare.
    I get what you're saying but to me that's semantics, like arguing over what maths is. It is useless. (not maths but the arguing )

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    We have systems of knowledge such as science which are verifiable, ie two people can look at that system and come to the same conclusions.

    That system cannot 100% be verified in terms of producing knowledge, but the fact that the knowledge it produces behaves exactly as you'd expect it to assuming it correlated correctly to a fixed reality outside of it renders the assumption that it isn't true utterly irrational.
    aye, I don't deny science I have almost absolute trust in it

    I'm sympathetic to skepticism about absolute certainty of knowledge. However, I laugh at the idea that because there's a tiny chance our knowledge might be unreliable, therefore we should ignore it and assume the most unlikely, ridiculous possibility; that reality changes from person to person and doesn't exist. There's no reason to assume that. And to apply it to economic policy?? laughable.
    my main point was that we can define reality however we want, and as he is talking about society (which we make) we can redefine social reality.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by reallydontknow)
    Okay so your example was wrong. Yet your pint is still valid, is that your point?

    No my friend. It doesn't work like that, I agree with the person above you. There is a chance that anything is wrong. But that doesn't mean we can discard everything. That's ridiculous.

    Occams razor. Read about it.

    I can say that it will not rain hamburgers and ketchup tomorrow. Now that isn't 100% as these hamburgers could materialise out of nowhere but physics and probability say that they will most likely not. So you can exclude this.

    For arguments like yours razors are the way forward.

    And please stop being such a try hard hipster postmodernist

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    my example was right (albeit mundane)


    I never claimed that anything was wrong just that it might.

    And I am only stating my honest opinions.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Holy ****, they are actually bat **** crazy.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.