A
Abba
Guest
Okay, here we go…
How many philosophers does it take to change a light bulb?
How many philosophers does it take to change a light bulb?
- Status
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
I don’t know. How many does it take?
A
Abba
Guest
Three.
One to change it and two more to argue whether the bulb exists or not.
What do you have? Seen anything interesting lately?
One to change it and two more to argue whether the bulb exists or not.
What do you have? Seen anything interesting lately?
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
G
GEddie
Guest
And one more to ponder the meaning of darkness…
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
But what if I don’t exist?
G
GEddie
Guest
Then you are just an abstraction, and as such a no-body?But what if I don’t exist?
G
GEddie
Guest
Rene Descartes was in a bar at closing time; and the barkeep asked him if he would like one for the road.
Descartes said: “I think not…”
…and went POOF!!!
Descartes said: “I think not…”
…and went POOF!!!
E
Earnest_Bunbury
Guest
St. Thomas Aquinas could change his own light bulb. :idea:
G
GEddie
Guest
Back then, if you had a good idea, did a candle light off above your head???
C
Catholic90
Guest
Did the candle really exist?
A
Abba
Guest
Scene 1: I know that I know nothing.
Scene 3: Trying to discredit our educational system, heh?
Scene 3: Trying to discredit our educational system, heh?
A
Abba
Guest
Marx en el infierno
Se muere Marx y se va al infierno. A los tres dias sube el demonio a ver a San Pedro. -Hola, ¡qué mala cara traes! -No me hables, macho, que me han mandao a un tal Marx, y ya no hay quien haga nada en el infierno. El tío ha montao una revolución, con manifestaciones, huelgas… para que te voy a contar. -Oye, pues mándamelo p’aca unas semanas, a ver si se calman las cosas ahí abajo. -Pedro, macho, me has salvao la vida. Esta tarde te lo mando.
A las 3 semanas vuelve a subir Lucifer.
-¿Qué, cómo os va con el Marx ese que os mande? -Ah, perfecto, macho, el tío se ha integrado aquí como nadie. Ha hecho amigos con los ángeles, con los santos…
El demonio, sorprendido dice:
-Pero… pero… ¿y qué dice Cristo a todo esto? -Uy! Cristo y Marx son íntimos, como uña y carne, siempre juntos discutiendo problemas filosóficos…
El demonio no da crédito a lo que oye, y pregunta: -Pero bueno, ¿y Dios qué dice a todo esto? -¿Dios…? ¿Dios…? ¡Pero si Dios no existe!!
Abba trans:
Marx in Hell
Marx dies and goes to hell. After three days the devil goes up to see Saint Peter. 'Hello, what a face you bring! -Do not talk, man, I have a certain Marx that was sent to me, and ever since no one can do anything in hell. The guy has mounted a revolution, with demonstrations, strikes … why tell you. -Hey, then send him to me for a few weeks to see if things calm down there. Peter, man, you have saved my life. This afternoon I will send him to you.
Three weeks later Lucifer goes up.
Cuando en una ocasión le preguntaron a San Agustín qué hacía Dios antes de crear el mundo, contestó: “Estaba creando un infierno para las personas que hacen preguntas como esa”.
Saint Augustin:
In one occasion Augustine was asked; what did God do before creating the world, replied: “He was creating a hell for people who ask questions like this one.”
Se muere Marx y se va al infierno. A los tres dias sube el demonio a ver a San Pedro. -Hola, ¡qué mala cara traes! -No me hables, macho, que me han mandao a un tal Marx, y ya no hay quien haga nada en el infierno. El tío ha montao una revolución, con manifestaciones, huelgas… para que te voy a contar. -Oye, pues mándamelo p’aca unas semanas, a ver si se calman las cosas ahí abajo. -Pedro, macho, me has salvao la vida. Esta tarde te lo mando.
A las 3 semanas vuelve a subir Lucifer.
-¿Qué, cómo os va con el Marx ese que os mande? -Ah, perfecto, macho, el tío se ha integrado aquí como nadie. Ha hecho amigos con los ángeles, con los santos…
El demonio, sorprendido dice:
-Pero… pero… ¿y qué dice Cristo a todo esto? -Uy! Cristo y Marx son íntimos, como uña y carne, siempre juntos discutiendo problemas filosóficos…
El demonio no da crédito a lo que oye, y pregunta: -Pero bueno, ¿y Dios qué dice a todo esto? -¿Dios…? ¿Dios…? ¡Pero si Dios no existe!!
Abba trans:
Marx in Hell
Marx dies and goes to hell. After three days the devil goes up to see Saint Peter. 'Hello, what a face you bring! -Do not talk, man, I have a certain Marx that was sent to me, and ever since no one can do anything in hell. The guy has mounted a revolution, with demonstrations, strikes … why tell you. -Hey, then send him to me for a few weeks to see if things calm down there. Peter, man, you have saved my life. This afternoon I will send him to you.
Three weeks later Lucifer goes up.
- How goes with the Marx I sent you? Ah, perfect, man, the guy has been integrated here as anyone. He made friends with the angels, with saints …
The devil in surprise says:
'But … but … So what does Christ say to this? -Oh! Christ and Marx are intimate, like hand and glove, always together discussing philosophical problems …
The devil can not believe what he hears, and asks: 'But, what does God say to this? - God …? God …?But, God does not exist!
Cuando en una ocasión le preguntaron a San Agustín qué hacía Dios antes de crear el mundo, contestó: “Estaba creando un infierno para las personas que hacen preguntas como esa”.
Saint Augustin:
In one occasion Augustine was asked; what did God do before creating the world, replied: “He was creating a hell for people who ask questions like this one.”
I
inocente
Guest
A proof found online, in the style of Thomas Aquinas.
Whether Santa Claus exists?
Objection 1: It seems presents may be given by the good elves, and so there is no need for Santa Claus.
Objection 2: Further, if Santa Claus existed, there would be no chimneys too narrow for him. But there are chimneys too narrow for him, and sometimes none at all. Therefore Santa Claus does not exist.
On the contrary, the Ronettes say “I saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus”.
I answer that the existence of Santa Claus can be proved in five ways:
The first and most evident way is the argument from Christmas trees. It is certain and evident to our senses that some things in this world are Christmas trees. Now no fir tree becomes a Christmas tree unless it is trimmed. But to be trimmed means that one receives an ornament. And since one cannot go on to infinity in the passing on of Christmas tree ornaments, there must be a First Untrimmed Trimmer, and this everyone understands to be Santa Claus.
The second way is from the notion of Christmas presents. In this world we find the giving of Christmas presents. Now he who gives Christmas presents either made them in his workshop, or got them from someone else. And since, if no one makes presents in his workshop, there will be no giving of Christmas presents, there must be a first giver of Christmas presents, to whom everyone gives the name of Santa Claus.
The third way is from the plastic image of Santa Claus. In all department stores we see plastic images that represent Santa Claus. Now these are representations of Santa Claus either because of Santa himself, or because of some other image of Santa. Now there can be no infinite regression in representation, and so there must be something which is like Santa Claus because it is Santa Claus.
The fourth way is taken from the degrees of Christmas Spirit. We see that people in the world have more or less of the Christmas Spirit. But “more” or “less” is said only with reference to “most”; and so there must be someone who has the most Christmas Spirit, and this someone we call Santa Claus.
The fifth way is taken from the conduct of children. As Christmas approaches we see children, who lack intelligence, acting for an end, which is shown by their always (or almost always) being good. But children would not be good for Christmas unless someone ensured that they were good. This someone is known by all to be Santa Claus.
Reply to Objection 1: Since the good elves got the presents they give from someone else, they must be, at the very most, Santa’s helpers; and without someone to help, viz. Santa Claus, there can be no helpers.
Reply to Objection 2: It is not impossible that Santa use the door like everyone else.
Whether Santa Claus exists?
Objection 1: It seems presents may be given by the good elves, and so there is no need for Santa Claus.
Objection 2: Further, if Santa Claus existed, there would be no chimneys too narrow for him. But there are chimneys too narrow for him, and sometimes none at all. Therefore Santa Claus does not exist.
On the contrary, the Ronettes say “I saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus”.
I answer that the existence of Santa Claus can be proved in five ways:
The first and most evident way is the argument from Christmas trees. It is certain and evident to our senses that some things in this world are Christmas trees. Now no fir tree becomes a Christmas tree unless it is trimmed. But to be trimmed means that one receives an ornament. And since one cannot go on to infinity in the passing on of Christmas tree ornaments, there must be a First Untrimmed Trimmer, and this everyone understands to be Santa Claus.
The second way is from the notion of Christmas presents. In this world we find the giving of Christmas presents. Now he who gives Christmas presents either made them in his workshop, or got them from someone else. And since, if no one makes presents in his workshop, there will be no giving of Christmas presents, there must be a first giver of Christmas presents, to whom everyone gives the name of Santa Claus.
The third way is from the plastic image of Santa Claus. In all department stores we see plastic images that represent Santa Claus. Now these are representations of Santa Claus either because of Santa himself, or because of some other image of Santa. Now there can be no infinite regression in representation, and so there must be something which is like Santa Claus because it is Santa Claus.
The fourth way is taken from the degrees of Christmas Spirit. We see that people in the world have more or less of the Christmas Spirit. But “more” or “less” is said only with reference to “most”; and so there must be someone who has the most Christmas Spirit, and this someone we call Santa Claus.
The fifth way is taken from the conduct of children. As Christmas approaches we see children, who lack intelligence, acting for an end, which is shown by their always (or almost always) being good. But children would not be good for Christmas unless someone ensured that they were good. This someone is known by all to be Santa Claus.
Reply to Objection 1: Since the good elves got the presents they give from someone else, they must be, at the very most, Santa’s helpers; and without someone to help, viz. Santa Claus, there can be no helpers.
Reply to Objection 2: It is not impossible that Santa use the door like everyone else.
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
Abba trans:
Marx in Hell
Marx dies and goes to hell. After three days the devil goes up to see Saint Peter. 'Hello, what a face you bring! -Do not talk, man, I have a certain Marx that was sent to me, and ever since no one can do anything in hell. The guy has mounted a revolution, with demonstrations, strikes … why tell you. -Hey, then send him to me for a few weeks to see if things calm down there. Peter, man, you have saved my life. This afternoon I will send him to you.
Three weeks later Lucifer goes up.
- How goes with the Marx I sent you? Ah, perfect, man, the guy has been integrated here as anyone. He made friends with the angels, with saints …
The devil in surprise says:
'But … but … So what does Christ say to this? -Oh! Christ and Marx are intimate, like hand and glove, always together discussing philosophical problems …
The devil can not believe what he hears, and asks: 'But, what does God say to this? - God …? God …?But, God does not exist!
D
danserr
Guest
On the contrary, I answer that the light being eternal and infinite cannot be changed. Clean your glasses.
(stolen/paraphrased from an intro to Aquinas
A
Abba
Guest
This is a beauty… enjoy…
The Philosophical Lexicon
http://www.philosophicallexicon.com/eeek2.gif
INTRODUCTION
The pantheon of philosophy has contributed previous little to the English language, compared with other fields. What can philosophy offer to compare with the galvanizing volts, ohms and watts of physics, the sandwiches, cardigans, and raglan sleeves of the British upper crust, the sado-masochism of their Continental counterparts, or even the leotards of the circus world? We speak of merely platonic affairs, and Gilbert Ryle has given his name to a measure of beer (roughly three-quarters of a pint), but the former is inappropriate to say the least, and the latter is restricted to the patois used in certain quarters of Oxford. There are, of course, the legion of pedantic terms ending in “ian” and “ism”, such as “neo-Augustinian Aristotelianism”, “Russellian theory of descriptions”, and such marginally philosophic terms as “Cartesian coordinate” and “Machiavellian”, but these terms have never been, nor deserved to be, a living part of the language. To remedy this situation we propose that philosophers make a self-conscious effort to adopt the following new terms. With a little practice these terms can become an important part of your vocabulary, to the point that you will wonder how philosophy ever proceeded without them.
Some samples:
code, v. To render unintelligible by substituting a literal translation. Hence code, n. the product of coding. “What he says about Aristotle sounds like code to me.” (See also kripkography.)
buber, v. To struggle in a morass of one’s own making. “After I defined the self as a relation that relates to itself relatingly, I bubered around for three pages.” Hence buber, n. one who bubers. “When my mistake was pointed out to me, I felt like a complete buber.”
brownian motion, n. A very small oscillation about an almost invisible point, often found in minute philosophical analyses. “His chisholming of that definition was a textbook example of brownian motion.”
frege, n. (only in the idiom, to beg the frege) To acknowledge the inconsistency of one’s position but maintain it anyway.
immanuel, n. (from im-, not, + manual, guide or rulebook) A set of instructions for doing something that kant (q.v.) be done.
u****namuno, v. To become pathologically transfixed on one’s own death from puberty until its realization
voltaire, n. A unit of enlightenment. Hence voltairage, as in the warning to would-be purveyors of superstition and tyranny: “Danger: high voltairage in this vicinity.”
More here:
philosophicallexicon.com/
I don’t get the one for kant though. What’s a sich?
enjoy…The Philosophical Lexicon
http://www.philosophicallexicon.com/eeek2.gif
INTRODUCTION
The pantheon of philosophy has contributed previous little to the English language, compared with other fields. What can philosophy offer to compare with the galvanizing volts, ohms and watts of physics, the sandwiches, cardigans, and raglan sleeves of the British upper crust, the sado-masochism of their Continental counterparts, or even the leotards of the circus world? We speak of merely platonic affairs, and Gilbert Ryle has given his name to a measure of beer (roughly three-quarters of a pint), but the former is inappropriate to say the least, and the latter is restricted to the patois used in certain quarters of Oxford. There are, of course, the legion of pedantic terms ending in “ian” and “ism”, such as “neo-Augustinian Aristotelianism”, “Russellian theory of descriptions”, and such marginally philosophic terms as “Cartesian coordinate” and “Machiavellian”, but these terms have never been, nor deserved to be, a living part of the language. To remedy this situation we propose that philosophers make a self-conscious effort to adopt the following new terms. With a little practice these terms can become an important part of your vocabulary, to the point that you will wonder how philosophy ever proceeded without them.
Some samples:
code, v. To render unintelligible by substituting a literal translation. Hence code, n. the product of coding. “What he says about Aristotle sounds like code to me.” (See also kripkography.)
buber, v. To struggle in a morass of one’s own making. “After I defined the self as a relation that relates to itself relatingly, I bubered around for three pages.” Hence buber, n. one who bubers. “When my mistake was pointed out to me, I felt like a complete buber.”
brownian motion, n. A very small oscillation about an almost invisible point, often found in minute philosophical analyses. “His chisholming of that definition was a textbook example of brownian motion.”
frege, n. (only in the idiom, to beg the frege) To acknowledge the inconsistency of one’s position but maintain it anyway.
immanuel, n. (from im-, not, + manual, guide or rulebook) A set of instructions for doing something that kant (q.v.) be done.
u****namuno, v. To become pathologically transfixed on one’s own death from puberty until its realization
voltaire, n. A unit of enlightenment. Hence voltairage, as in the warning to would-be purveyors of superstition and tyranny: “Danger: high voltairage in this vicinity.”
More here:
philosophicallexicon.com/
I don’t get the one for kant though. What’s a sich?
I
itinerant1
Guest
How many deconstructionists does it take to change a light bulb?
On the contrary, the NILE is the longest river in Africa.
On the contrary, the NILE is the longest river in Africa.
I
itinerant1
Guest
How many Epicureans does it take to change a light bulb?
None-they’re too busy taking advantage of the darkness!
None-they’re too busy taking advantage of the darkness!
4
4Horsemen
Guest
*“We don’t allow faster-than-light neutrinos in here,” says the bartender.
A neutrino walks into a bar.*
(circulating on the internet)
A neutrino walks into a bar.*
(circulating on the internet)
- Status