I sometimes wonder if some people simply cannot distinguish different specific concepts from broadly defined terms and maybe that's why equivocation is so powerful.
-
-
Replying to @Intrinsic29
I imagine it as some people having thought processes like design schematics and some having them as fluffy idea clouds. And I suspect this also relates to the way people write.
5 replies 2 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
That's an interesting way to conceptualize it. There seems to be a difference in the connection between ideas and their labels too.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @HPluckrose
That’s why in analytic philosophy (and perhaps other subjects too I don’t know) writers often start by defining some of the key terms. Saves a huge amount of bother, especially since this way many of the concerns a reader might have are likely crop up at the outset.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @rebeccatun @Intrinsic29
Yes, but they also get stuck here forever analysing the word and then all the words they used to define the word until they get to one which is a grand concept which can never be thoroughly defined and so we're stuck. Then I want to murder them with a chainsaw.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @rebeccatun
Lol I like a lot of analytic philosophy but when it gets too meta, it loses me or when it's used fallaciously to cash out nonsense.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Yes, I know the kind. The kind that exists to get you further away from ever understanding anything.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.