'There is no black person who can be racist'

[skimread]

First of all.
In (your) post #45, you said:

Post #45 starts with a supposition. What is racism? Seeing another as inferior to yourself or hating another? if the former then he is right.
In reading it is usually good to read the first sentences to get the context.

Can you not see just how silly/stupid that statement is?
A fool would say something like that.
You said that.
Classic DK.

Another forum member raises the same issue and I clearly state is a supposition since it has a question mark and an if. But facts don't matter to you. Ignoring context. That's you.

Secondly.
Why are you trying to explain Philosophy to me?
I know what it is.

You obviously don't.

Philosophy be the study/field/discipline of Logic.
Not every thought qualifies as Philosophy.

If the "thought" has the word "philosophy" in it then it makes it rather obvious.

Fourthly.
You further accuse me of stupidity.

Please substantiate your accusation.
Show me where I made a mistake, and the stupidity thereof.
That's to say if you can do so.
The real irony would be if you are unable to do so.

Your statement

"To boldly state that philosophy (philosophizing) is dead, is to boldly state that you are a complete and utter moron.
The victim of such a level/degree of stupidity is completely oblivious of this stupidity.
This is Dunning Kruger."

The above is the stupidest statement I have ever read on this forum.
Your very response proves, not disproves the statement!
Your statement above is so stupid you invented a whole new level of stupidity.
Your statement is so stupid that they should have a picture with you and it in philosophy textbooks.
Your statement is so uniquely stupid that in the whole world's history forward and back, never again will you get someone else utter that response to the claim that philosophy is dead.

Then you keep on doubling down, doubling down. Like an AI bot.

Finally.
The purpose of debate is to learn.
I attack fallacious (false) logic.
You have shown that you do not see/understand/grasp that Racism and Xenophobia are in fact (logically) the same type/kind of stupid/silly hatred.
Please think.

Here you go again in a loop.

 

[Ponderer]

@skimread

"Philosophy as practiced nowadays is a waste of time.
Philosophy is ‘dead’ since it hasn’t kept up with the latest developments in science, especially theoretical physics. In earlier times philosophers not only tried to keep up but sometimes made significant scientific contributions of their own. However they were now, in so far as they had any influence at all, just an obstacle to progress through their endless going-on about the same old issues of truth, knowledge, the problem of induction, and so forth. Had philosophers just paid a bit more attention to the scientific literature they would have gathered that these were no longer live issues for anyone remotely au fait with the latest thinking. Then their options would be either to shut up shop and cease the charade called ‘philosophy of science’ or else to carry on and invite further ridicule for their head-in-the-sand attitude." – Stephen Hawking

Care to respond?

 

[skimread]

@skimread

"Philosophy as practiced nowadays is a waste of time.
Philosophy is ‘dead’ since it hasn’t kept up with the latest developments in science, especially theoretical physics. In earlier times philosophers not only tried to keep up but sometimes made significant scientific contributions of their own. However they were now, in so far as they had any influence at all, just an obstacle to progress through their endless going-on about the same old issues of truth, knowledge, the problem of induction, and so forth. Had philosophers just paid a bit more attention to the scientific literature they would have gathered that these were no longer live issues for anyone remotely au fait with the latest thinking. Then their options would be either to shut up shop and cease the charade called ‘philosophy of science’ or else to carry on and invite further ridicule for their head-in-the-sand attitude." – Stephen Hawking

Care to respond?

This proves you are an AI bot. You just googled "Philosophy is dead"

you are like " OK Google. Is philosophy dead." You get an answer "this is the results I could find". You paste the first result without taking any stance.

What are you trying to say? Must, I guess?

Ok let's play your game.

You state" "To boldly state that philosophy (philosophizing) is dead, is to boldly state that you are a complete and utter moron."

Then you post a quote of Stephen Hawking: "Philosophy is ‘dead’ .

According to your logic, are you saying Stephen Hawking is a complete and utter moron?

 

[Ponderer]

This proves you are an AI bot. You just googled "Philosophy is dead"

you are like " OK Google. Is philosophy dead." You get an answer "this is the results I could find". You paste the first result without taking any stance.

What are you trying to say? Must, I guess?

Ok let's play your game.

You state" "To boldly state that philosophy (philosophizing) is dead, is to boldly state that you are a complete and utter moron."

Then you post a quote of Stephen Hawking: "Philosophy is ‘dead’ .

According to your logic, are you saying Stephen Hawking is a complete and utter moron?

What have you to say about what Hawking said?
Do you agree with what he said?

 

[netstrider]

The whole world has become a series of labels.

White / Black / Coloured / Person of colour (almost sounds as if anyone not of colour is transparent) etc.
Racist
Xenophobic
SJW
Leftist / Right-wing
INTJ / ENFP or whatever personality types people are labelled with
Woke
Karen
Not to mention the myriad of gender acronyms
Liberal
Conservative

Each carrying with it negative connotations depending on who you ask.

It's really not helping.

 

[skimread]

What have you to say about what Hawking said?
Do you agree with what he said?

You are an AI bot who live in a world of absolutes. The concept of context evades you.

From that short quote what he seems he seems to be criticizing a specific branch of philosophy namely the "philosophy of science". That is the context of his quote. That specific branch of philosophy tries to apply philosophy to science. He seems to say that Science is progressing but that specific branch theory is not adapting/progressing its theory with it.

My view of why I say philosophy/philosophizing is dead is because the current world (huma sciences, everyday life, laws, media, internet, debates,) prevent its progression. He seems to say from his quote that a specific sphere of philosophy, the sphere that deals with philosophizing science hasn't evolved/advanced with science.

I didn't study that specific branch of philosophy to agree with what he says or not.

 

[skimread]

You state" "To boldly state that philosophy (philosophizing) is dead, is to boldly state that you are a complete and utter moron."

Then you post a quote of Stephen Hawking: "Philosophy is ‘dead’ .

According to your logic, are you saying Stephen Hawking is a complete and utter moron?

You haven't answered. This seems to be a habit of you.
You just criticize but don't want to be accountable for what you say.

 

[Ponderer]

You are an AI bot who live in a world of absolutes.

Are you saying there are no absolutes?
If so, are you absolutely sure of that?

The concept of context evades you.

No - I am quite familiar with the concept of semantics.

From that short quote what he seems he seems to be criticizing a specific branch of philosophy namely the "philosophy of science". That is the context of his quote. That specific branch of philosophy tries to apply philosophy to science. He seems to say that Science is progressing but that specific branch theory is not adapting/progressing its theory with it.

He is in fact claiming that Science has supplanted Philosophy.
Not only is he claiming that Philosophy is a complete waste of time, he in fact claims that it impedes Science.
He claims that there is no "place" for Philosophy in Science - that Philosophy must be kept out of and away from Science.
Hawking does not claim that Philosophy is figuratively dead - he claims that it is truly dead.

Now.
What say you about it - do you agree with Hawking, or do you disagree.
Do you think Hawking is a genius for saying that Philosophy is dead?

I didn't study that specific branch of philosophy to agree with what he says or not.

What specific/particular branch/es of Philosophy did you study?

 

[Ponderer]

You haven't answered. This seems to be a habit of you.
You just criticize but don't want to be accountable for what you say.

See post #169.

 

[skimread]

Are you saying there are no absolutes?
If so, are you absolutely sure of that?


No - I am quite familiar with the concept of semantics.


He is in fact claiming that Science has supplanted Philosophy.
Not only is he claiming that Philosophy is a complete waste of time, he in fact claims that it impedes Science.
He claims that there is no "place" for Philosophy in Science - that Philosophy must be kept out of and away from Science.
Hawking does not claim that Philosophy is figuratively dead - he claims that it is truly dead.

Now.
What say you about it - do you agree with Hawking, or do you disagree.
Do you think Hawking is a genius for saying that Philosophy is dead?


What specific/particular branch/es of Philosophy did you study?

The very quote you gave he says " cease the charade called ‘philosophy of science’ ". The branch called Philosophy of science. The branch that philosophizes about science. That is the context. You live in a world of where you take things out of context. You then claim "he in fact claim that Science has supplemented Philosophy" and exclude part of the quote you just provided.

You come at things with such extreme misdirection angles. It is impossible to have any meaningful debate with you.

 

[Ponderer]

The very quote you gave he says " cease the charade called ‘philosophy of science’ ". The branch called Philosophy of science. The branch that philosophizes about science. That is the context. You live in a world of where you take things out of context. You then claim "he in fact claim that Science has supplemented Philosophy" and exclude part of the quote you just provided.

You come at things with such extreme misdirection angles. It is impossible to have any meaningful debate with you.

Do you agree with him?

 

[skimread]

See post #169.

Your answer is not an answer. it is misdirection.

You say " To boldly state that philosophy (philosophizing) is dead, is to boldly state that you are a complete and utter moron."

Then in your latest post post #169 you say "do you agree that hawking is a genius for saying philosophy is dead?"

Are you saying genius or moron? Make up your mind.

Only and AI bot can make the number of conflicting statements you making. It is not possible for a human to make these statements.
What point are you trying to make? What is your agenda? You have failed the Turing test.

Aren't there T&C of mybb that says AI bots cannot post messages? If not, I think they should introduce it.

 

[skimread]

Do you agree with him?

I was the one who said Philosophy was dead. I clearly explained why I said and provided the context what I said in post #154:

'There is no black person who can be racist'

The problem is that hypocrites in power are still in power. Pointing it out won't help. In the end whether you like it or not the ones who win are right because they write the history books. You are not smart for being the canary in the coal mine. You are dead. Someone quoted Aleksandr...

mybroadband.co.za

I didn't know Hawking also said that statement as well. Like I said I haven't read Hawking's book where he makes the statement. I cannot agree or disagree without reading his book to get the full context. I am not going to as what I can see from the quote that the context, he is using is different to mine. See #154

The answer is the same not the context. What are you trying to prove Mr Bot?

I cannot believe I am conversing with a bot.

 

[Mekon]

So when blacks are being racist they not being racist?

 

[netstrider]

So when blacks are being racist they nor being racist?

Apparently.

 

[skimread]

So when blacks are being racist they nor being racist?

In any argument you are your wife has. Who wins?

Your wife is always right as she runs the household. You want to keep the peace. See what happens when you disagree.

Whether you like it or not the left is in control. They make the rules.

 

[Ponderer]

Your answer is not an answer. it is misdirection.

You say " To boldly state that philosophy (philosophizing) is dead, is to boldly state that you are a complete and utter moron."

Then in your latest post post #169 you say "do you agree that hawking is a genius for saying philosophy is dead?"

Are you saying genius or moron? Make up your mind.

Only and AI bot can make the number of conflicting statements you making. It is not possible for a human to make these statements.
What point are you trying to make? What is your agenda? You have failed the Turing test.

Aren't there T&C of mybb that says AI bots cannot post messages? If not, I think they should introduce it.

Stephen Hawking is an educated fool (as opposed to an uneducated fool).
'Tis but one of many stupid things he said.
He is most definitely no genius.

I am further not aware that I made any conflicting statements.
You are confused, and trying to blame me for confusing you.

You said:
"Only and AI bot can make the number of conflicting statements you making."
...
"You have failed the Turing test."
First you claim that my logic be that of a "bot", and then you claim that I fail the "Turing test".
How is that not a glaring contradiction (conflicting statement)?

 

[Ponderer]

So when blacks are being racist they nor being racist?

Exactly.

 

[ForceFate]

Stephen Hawking is an educated fool (as opposed to an uneducated fool).
'Tis but one of many stupid things he said.
He is most definitely no genius.

I am further not aware that I made any conflicting statements.
You are confused, and trying to blame me for confusing you.

You said:
"Only and AI bot can make the number of conflicting statements you making."
...
"You have failed the Turing test."
First you claim that my logic be that of a "bot", and then you claim that I fail the "Turing test".
How is that not a glaring contradiction (conflicting statement)?

Someone with his IQ == is regarded a genius,,,---

 

[Ponderer]

Someone with his IQ == is regarded a genius,,,---

A fool with a high IQ is nonetheless a fool.