Academia.eduAcademia.edu

COHERENT PROBLEMS

What is the best theory of philosophical problems?

COHERENT PROBLEMS I. Perhaps that all major philosophers pose an important question, like this: The Dialectic of Philosophy (Philosophy's Most Important Questions) Here is a list of thinkers and schools with their questions. I think these are some of the greatest. (The order is approximately chronological, from oldest to newest. The attempt is to capture the soul of each particular philosopher's usefulness). Thales: What is substance? Anaximander: Is substance material? Heraclitus: What is time? Parmenides: Does the world change? Socrates: Who is the wisest? What do we know? Does anyone know anything? Plato: What is the just society? What makes a just ruler? Aristotle: What is appropriate knowledge? How can we know? Democritus: Of what particular materials is substance made? Protagoras: Is there a universal argument? Pyrrho: Is knowledge impossible? Aurelius: Does power have a philosophy? Machiavelli, Adam Smith, and Ayn Rand: Is there a philosophy for winners? Immanuel Kant: What is the moral law? Franz Brentano: What is the appropriate substance? Jean-Paul Sartre: What is existence? Ludwig Wittgenstein: How is philosophy compatible with mathematics? Karl Marx: Is there a philosophy ' for the people ' ? Bertrand Russell: What is outside the set? David K. Lewis: What is metaphysical logic? Gregory Vlastos: Where is the center? Nathan Coppedge: What is absolute knowledge? II. Or philosophical problems are paradoxes solved by the method of paroxysm: What is a general method for solving all paradoxes? The method called paroxysm or double-paradox is to my knowledge the first and only proposition ever made for the solution of all paradoxes. It is a method I formulated first in 2014, as a result of categorical developments in a book I was writing called The Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit, a self-published work. The method of paroxysm involves choosing the opposite of EVERY WORD in the best definition of the original paradox (except the word 'paradox' which is not included), and combining them in the same order as the respective original words. The result serves as a solution to the paradox. So, for example, with the Sorites paradox of the sound of hay falling, if we define the problem as "definite continuum" the paroxysm becomes "indefinite definitions". If we define the problem as "meaningless continuum" the paroxysm is "meaningful divisions". Depending on the way the problem is defined, it has different solutions. This is the only way to be sure that the paradox is solvable. For more information on Paroxysm, see: Paroxysm (Formal and Logical systems) Note: the method also extends to solving a wide variety of problems, in the sense that it defines what remains to be done. But this involves placing the term 'problem' with the problem, and 'solution' with the solution, because paradoxes are the only formal problems that remain problems when they are solved, and thus under my definition, are the only types of universal problems except in an incoherent universe. An example of a problem as opposed to a paradox is: problematic war is solved by peace. Problematic hate is solved by love. Notice the similarity to my method of categorical deduction. Categorical deduction is a more general method, since it deals with a wide variety of word pairs, not just 'problem vs. solution' and the opposite of a problematic term. See also a high-minded variation: High-Minded Colundrum. III. Or all problems are supposed to be philosophical: Problem-Solving and the Meaning of Life Let's hypothesize! There is a big problem: The Problem of Frustration: People are frustrated when God isn't frustrated. God is frustrated when people aren't frustrated. This is because God deals with immaterial, macro things, and people are material, micro things. A material solution has a spiritual problem and vice versa. All material problems either are themselves spiritual solutions, or are seeking to become them. The only exception is when there is a material solution or a spiritual problem. Thus, God and man are conflicted. But all I mean to convey is the problem of frustration, which is the problem that material solutions have spiritual problems, and spiritual solutions have material problems. Otherwise 'matter’ and 'spirit’ are not opposites, or perhaps one of them is universal and the other is not real (but in that case we have a choice between fake souls and unmagical matter). Now we are left with mostly one choice: Philosophy solves practical problems, and practicality solves philosophical problems. Although these are opposite, there is sufficient neutrality to not be contradictory. Philosophy is willing to be impractical, just as practicality is willing to be un-philosophical. Un-philosophical solutions do not have to be impractical problems. In other words, all problems should be philosophical. IV. Or that problems are problematic, and so true nature doesn't have problems. What are four obvious things that might radically change someone's life? What’s good is really good, so good things are possible. There's no equivocating. Problems are problematic. So, if you think about it, nature is against problems. Insofar as life is authentic, there aren't any problems. Possibility is possible, so it's impossibly possible or possibly impossible, or impossibly impossible, or already true. But since these categories technically describe everything, then everything that is possible can happen insofar as it is possible. For, afterall, what is impossible if it is not impossibly impossible? And, how can possible not be possible? And, since both seem to express possibility, then the intermediates must also express possibility. For if the possible is impossible, that is still impossibly impossible, and if the impossible is possible, that is still possibly possible. (Apparently, the impossible is impossible. So, what we mean by impossible is really yet another form of possibility. But if that is true, there is nothing contradicting possibility). Insofar as you die, you are already dead. So how do you die? You can't, unless it is not you. Coppedge, Nathan / SCSU 2017/06/06, p.
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy