What is Mathematics? - an addendum to the comments between Talbert and Maggot

GSTalbert1

Girlvinyl
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
6,754
Location
The Land of the Coon-Ass
But for starters I must say I doubt very much a kike schoolar said something on that vibe...in fact, he seems to stablish a difference between reason and emotion, if anything.

Quoting him: "...correspond to different evaluative faculties, the theoretical intellect or the spirited part of the soul or the practical/material intellect"

Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 12.00.17 AM.png
Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 12.00.46 AM.png
 

scumhook

Managing account details
Joined
Jul 15, 2011
Messages
19,642
Location
Your Anus
Website
www.ungod.ly

CallMeMaggot

Girlvinyl
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
14,327
And as expected, Maimonides isn't saying that emotion and reason are the same, at all

He's saying there that there's no way you can tell a priori if some (not-obviously-contradictory-or-retareded) though you just had is true or false without actualy checking it.

You seem to mistake imagination with emotion, for some strange reason. I guess the term blind rage is a contradiction for you, lol
 

GSTalbert1

Girlvinyl
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
6,754
Location
The Land of the Coon-Ass
There's a few more articles. It's rediculous to assume some sort of logic in regards to experience, logic is how you would go about describing it to another person. Mathematical Logic I.e AI is nonsense. One of the critical disagreements by Spinoza with Maimonides was on this specific point as Spinoza sides with you.
 

GSTalbert1

Girlvinyl
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
6,754
Location
The Land of the Coon-Ass
And as expected, Maimonides isn't saying that emotion and reason are the same, at all

He's saying there that there's no way you can tell a priori if some (not-obviously-contradictory-or-retareded) though you just had is true or false without actualy checking it.

You seem to mistake imagination with emotion, for some strange reason. I guess the term blind rage is a contradiction for you, lol
No no you can't read him as you would a Kantian. Logic claims to be the patterns of thought. It's really just a structure we use for communication. He's arguing before the court of religio and therefore a body politic. The purpose of medieval philosophy is to is to find the truth which resides in the opinions of the citizens of the city of excellence.
 

GSTalbert1

Girlvinyl
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
6,754
Location
The Land of the Coon-Ass
Go for the kabbalah if u like that shit, it's like +9000 power circlejerk on that
Oh my fucking sides. I guess this may explain why I never really enjoyed Heidegger too much:
https://jewishreviewofbooks.com/articles/993/national-socialism-world-jewry-and-the-history-of-being-heideggers-black-notebooks/

In the Black Notebooks Heidegger’s misplaced reverence for Being qua “destiny” occasionally reaches absurd proportions. For instance he attributes numinous power to names that begin with the letter H: Heraclitus, Hölderlin, and Hegel. But Hitler would also seem to belong to the list, as would, of course, Heidegger. Heidegger also indulges in baseless numerological prophesizing, conjecturing that a final “decision” (Entscheidung) on the planetary reign of “Americanism” will come to pass in 2300. He also predicts that in the year 2327 his own name will re-emerge from the oblivion of forgetting, that is, on the 400th anniversary of the publication of Being and Time.
LOL - this shit is Hubbard territory.
 

GSTalbert1

Girlvinyl
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
6,754
Location
The Land of the Coon-Ass
Or Horatios'



...but certainly not Hume's.
It may make me look like a loony woo worshiper but some of this I can sympathize with, in part with grave reservations.

During the late 1930s, as Nazi aggression precipitated a series of crises pushing Europe toward the precipice of war, the ideological fervor of Heidegger’s political judgments escalated accordingly. By propagating the debased, technical-instrumental values of “welfare,” “reason,” and “culture,” the “Western Revolutions” gave rise to the impersonal “despotism of No One—the unadulterated . . . empowerment of limitless planning and calculation” that holds sway in the contemporary world. Implausibly, Heidegger describes Bolshevism as the culmination of the English Revolution: “The character of modernity is the total and unrelenting fabrication (Machenschaft) of all Being.” Once one abstracts from their “political, social, and religious forms,” the English state and the “state of the united Soviet republics” are, Heidegger affirms, “the same,” insofar as both subscribe to the same ruthless logic of technological world mastery. “The bourgeois-Christian form of English Bolshevism,” Heidegger asserts, must be “annihilated.” In such confused delusional ramblings, Heidegger’s utter incapacity for real political judgment stands fully exposed.

Whereas Heidegger excelled at finding fault with non-Germanic cultures, he was strangely impervious to Nazi Germany’s predatory and genocidal practices, despite living in the midst of them. In the early 1940s, he observes that reports of Soviet atrocities have been especially gruesome, but concerning the depredations of the Wehrmacht and the Einsatzgruppen in the East, he is entirely silent. He justifies Germany’s inhumane treatment of Czechoslovakia and Poland by claiming that were France and England to triumph they would do the same to Germany. Yet, from the standpoint of the history of Being, a French and English victory would be much worse: France would undoubtedly inflict its “ahistoricality” on Germany. England would presumably do the same, turning all that it touched into a “giant business concern.” Thus, a German triumph is the only way to ensure what he goes on to describe as a “transition toward reflection” as the initial step toward an “other Beginning.”

Heidegger’s fears about the planetary spread of “Americanism,” coming from a land that he characterizes simply as the “site of catastrophe” (das Katastrophenhaft), are never far from view in this period. “With Americanism” he says, “nihilism attains its zenith.” The Americans embrace “the condition of nothingness [Nichtigkeit]” as “their future, since with the appearance of ‘happiness’ for everyone, they destroy everything.” Of course, Heidegger never made the slightest effort to investigate America—its politics, its culture, and its intellectual dispositions—since the standpoint of “history of Being” already tells him all that he needs to know.
 

Aroukar

EDF Elite
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
4,055
Location
America
Heidegger's was nutty as fuck, but then again most "philosophers" have some disorder eating them up.
 
Top