filtherton

Okay, does anyone remember where i said "most"?

I don't know, it seems like you folks are coming at me like i said that all philosophy is useless and a waste of time. If you read what i posted you would see that that is not at all what i said. I said most philosophical discussions are a waste of time because both sides are more concerned with being right than they are with devining any kind of knowledge. Are you trying to claim that that isn't the case? What is going on in this thread right now?


First of all, picking one line out of a paragraph and trying to refute said line as your sole means of refuting said paragraph isn't the most effective way to prove your point.
Second, doesn't calling out me out for the use of "so what" as a "typical" cop-out argument and then shortly thereafeter using the "well, you can't really conclusively prove anything" seem a little ironic to you? One says an argument isn't valuable because it is irrelevant, the other says an argument is invalid because, you know, we'll never really know. Both sound like "typical criticisms of philosophy that people bring up, usually when they can't think of a worthwhile argument."