It's photo of Donald Duck informing mickey that whatever is meaningless due to the fact that everything us know and also love deserve to be reducible to chemicals.

You are watching: Everything that we know and love is reducible

Mickey responds by speak "Hypocrite that you are, because that you to trust the chemicals in your brain to call you the they space chemicals. All knowledge is ultimately based on that which us cannot prove"

Which philosophers try to refute knowledge by suggesting that we have the right to never actually trust what we understand (doesn't need to be around "chemicals"). I understand Descartes starts choose this in his meditations. Ns guess Nietzsche also does in part form, probably in On Truth and Lies in a Non-Moral Sense.

Who else? Any good readings you can recommend?

EDIT: Also, what carry out you think that the argument? I understand Mickey isn't to be taken as well seriously, yet whatever


6 comments
share
save
hide
report
92% Upvoted
This object is archived
New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast
Sort by: best


*

level 1
· 3y · edited 3y
ancient Greek phil., phil. That science, Wittgenstein
The "Will friend fight? Or will certainly you perish prefer a dog?" resembles, at the very least in attitude, Nietzsche or Camus in an answer to the fatality of God or the Absurd, respectively.

I don't think "All understanding is ultimately based upon that which us cannot prove" is lot of a substantive statement. Also if one to be a hardcore foundationalist about knowledge, it'd it is in strange come expect every little thing foundational basic to be provable. Provability is to demonstrate the reality of a proposition through other, an ext basic knowledge, however foundational premises room the most basic knowledge by gift foundational. The explain "All understanding is ultimately based upon that which us cannot prove," I'd say, is simply a truism worded come sound profound.


14
Share
ReportSave
level 2
· 3y · edited 3y
Critical Theory, Kant, Early modern Phil.

Will friend fight? Or will certainly you perish like a dog?

Is part of the meme format


3
Share
ReportSave
level 2
· 2y

I recognize Camus likely wouldn’t, but would Nietzsche believe that superseding the heat death of the universe is a worthwhile ultimate endeavor if we can prove the was feasible by complete self awareness of all living things? This is type of how I’ve began to interpret his “Will to Power.”


1
Share
ReportSave
level 1
· 3y · edited 3y

Plato deals with this in his Cratylus in relationship to knowledge/names (words), ns mean, the possibility to know something with its name, that is, the manifestation of the essence of the point through naming.

I expect someone describes it better, my english it is not good enough

Edit: Names are conceived as imitations, with letters and syllables, of the essence of the thing itself. Simply imitations, like a paiting imitates the thing it represents however it’s not the thing itself.


4
Share
ReportSave
level 1
Comment gotten rid of by moderator · 3y
level 2
Mod
*
· 3y

Please bear in mind ours commenting rules:

All answers have to be informed and also aimed at helping the OP and also other reader reach an expertise of the problems at hand. Answers should portray an accurate picture the the issue and also the philosophical literature. Answers must be reasonably substantive.

This activity was prompted by a human moderator. Please perform not reply to this message, together this account is a bot. Instead, contact the moderators with inquiries or comments.

See more: Egg I Dreamed That I Was Old, #Egg I Dreamed I Was Old On Tumblr


0
Share
ReportSave
*

r/askphilosophy
/r/askphilosophy intends to provide serious, well-researched answers to philosophical questions.
195k

Members


294

Online


Created Feb 21, 2011
Join
*
*
*
*

*

Top write-ups march 8 hours 2019Top short articles of march, 2019Top articles 2019
helpjamesmerse.com coinsjamesmerse.com premiumjamesmerse.com gifts
aboutcareerspressadvertiseblogTermsContent policyPrivacy policyMod policy
Back to Top