>>24637318
The more you talk the more foolish you look. You think that you have a right to speak on philosophy when you haven't read/understood even Aristotle's Metaphysics, Kant's CPR, Hegel's PoS and you're wrong. I know you think philosophy is a matter of opinionating that anyone can do. Take a simple philosophical question - how are accidents related to definitions? Anyone can easily argue for either side; "Definitions are obviously conventional because each individual is different; we need definitions to make sense of the world, but the definitions in themselves can't be anything but conventions." Or, "Without real definitions, reasoning would be impossible. The alternative position defeats itself." Etc. Any fool can come up with quick arguments on either side of these old philosophical debates. But, in fact, philosophy is a conversation that has been developing for thousands of years, and to have a grasp on the nature of the questions, or the answers people give them, you have to actually read the books. But you think you don't really have to read them, you're smart enough without them. I don't know what to say, it's disgraceful, even sacrilegious, like the rapists in De Cons. My hope was that that thread would inspire one of you kids to say "damn, I really do need to read Aristotle. Time to hit the books!" Instead all I got was pseuds like you seething and insisting that you can do philosophy just fine without studying anything. You should be ashamed of yourself.
