That's assuming that metaphysical monism is false, that time is one of the categories of being, and that "they" weren't craftily hiding their guns (and other weapons of mass destruction) somewhere out of sight. How much of that do you uncritically accept, Cripza my Zipsta, and is not that uncritical acceptance (assuming it is such) analogically related to your caricatures of faith?
If "they" were individual monads, then metaphysical monism would be false.
I fail to see the difference between time as (one of) the necessary condition(s) for the possibility of experience and as one of the categories of being. To what does the difference amount, by your lights?
Any archeological evidence depends on further assumptions. Granted that these assumptions are reasonable, this still proves an epistemologico-psychologico-sociological point. I leave it to you to figure out what that might be.
As for "weapons of mass destruction," you are just being linguistically unimaginative.
If I am a fuckgrumplestump, I have no reason to believe it, so your assertion is just so much hot air until you give me at least some indication of what the severally necessary and jointly sufficient conditions are for fuckgrumplestump-being.
Jacobi? Fichte? Sounds interesting. But when it comes to that general time-period, Kierkegaard's attack against Hegel is of much more interest to me. Good luck with the paper.
Okay, I'll admit to an improper or at least unorthodox and thereby communicationally ineffective use of 'monism' and 'weapons of mass destruction.' But so is your use of the word 'fuckgrumplestump
( ... )
Comments 29
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
I fail to see the difference between time as (one of) the necessary condition(s) for the possibility of experience and as one of the categories of being. To what does the difference amount, by your lights?
Any archeological evidence depends on further assumptions. Granted that these assumptions are reasonable, this still proves an epistemologico-psychologico-sociological point. I leave it to you to figure out what that might be.
As for "weapons of mass destruction," you are just being linguistically unimaginative.
If I am a fuckgrumplestump, I have no reason to believe it, so your assertion is just so much hot air until you give me at least some indication of what the severally necessary and jointly sufficient conditions are for fuckgrumplestump-being.
Jacobi? Fichte? Sounds interesting. But when it comes to that general time-period, Kierkegaard's attack against Hegel is of much more interest to me. Good luck with the paper.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
i'm confused.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment