It's an aesthetic interpretation that undergirds an argument that matters, not the argumentation. It's self-consistent, but so are many arguments. Solipsism is self-consistent, that doesn't mean it is correct.
im not saying that, but your original thread was about spinoza and his descendants more generally
-
-
Yes- I am saying that I cannot fathom believing that the cosmos is a material accident & human existence is a contingency of contingencies making a big fuss over a blip on the timeline of empty aeons.
-
sounds like a lack of imagination on your part
-
I can imagine it- but I cannot imagine holding onto it as a precious insight of some sort. I can also imagine being momentarily suicidal, but not holding on to this inclination as a "glimpse into the truth" or somth.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.