I am interested in hearing about people’s views about the laws of nature. Here is an interesting article: Laws of Nature (Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy)
Of particular interest are the four questions:
(i) whether laws supervene on matters of fact,
(ii) the role laws play in the problem of induction,
(iii) whether laws involve metaphysical necessity, and
(iv) the role of laws in physics and how that contrasts with the role of laws in the special sciences
Which approach do you think best suits your outlook?
Systems, Universals, Humean Supervenience, Antirealism, Antireductionism, Induction, Necessity?
Lol, don’t be so tough on yourself there muffles, we all have flaws. Besides, we are all interested to have a decent philosophical discussion rather than getting personal or trolling right? Right?
That’s cute, but in practice, all you are doing is trolling and openly admitting it even. So… let’s get back on topic muffles, or at least try, I see the sceptics here have given wonderfully insightful input according to their (and yours of course) standards >:D…
Thankfully there are those of us who a) recognize satire and sarcasm when we see it and b) know that you consider anyone who dares to argue against you to be “uncivil” and “trolling”. A true case of the pot telling the kettle she is non-white.
Problem is, I am not asking anyone to debate or disagree or be uncivil or troll etc.
I am asking for people’s view about the subject at hand. So far… well, the response is disappointing and unfortunately not unexpected.
I can only hope for a bit of constructive input I guess… So how about contributing in a positive manner there old cyggiepop :P? Is that asking a bit much?
Ok then, if you think you are not lying to yourself there, so be it. If you ever feel the need to actually constructively provide input to the topic at hand, the invitation still stands ;).
If you ever feel the need to actually constructively provide input to the topic at hand, the invitation still stands ;).
Aah. Now it is to the "topic at hand"? Wasn't before so fuck you. I'll provide criticism and response and contribution as I see fit and never as you dictate or want me to. May as well live with it cause you'll never change it.
Fresh start for those who are actually interested in sharing their point of view with regards to laws of nature:
I am interested in hearing about people’s views about the laws of nature. Here is an interesting article:
Laws of Nature (Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy)
Of particular interest are the four questions:
(i) whether laws supervene on matters of fact,
(ii) the role laws play in the problem of induction,
(iii) whether laws involve metaphysical necessity, and
(iv) the role of laws in physics and how that contrasts with the role of laws in the special sciences
Which approach do you think best suits your outlook?
Systems, Universals, Humean Supervenience, Antirealism, Antireductionism, Induction, Necessity?
Okay, so that law is still as rigid as ever. Your pretences to innocence are as pathetic as your elaborate non-arguments. The only thing cute within a mile of here is the smallness of the number of regular forum contributors who have not seen through your laughable dross – that number presently being just one…
It is such a pity that personal differences can prevent people from constructive input to an interesting topic such as the laws of the universe :(. Oh well, if anyone is interested to share their views on the laws of the universe and contribute in a positive manner to the discussion, have fun :).