yeh! and gays! and alcholics! and people that wear pink on fridays! and Daily Mail readers!

 

 

 

Then we can form a tolerant liberal democracy based on acceptance with all those wierdos gone.

 

 

 

Don't mock me, if it was up to me my little green smilie would be sniping the scum that lingers on this earth, like a parasite to an open wound? I see that as a better idea to be honest. If it was up to you we could all skip hand in hand as equals knowing that the good people are working hard while people like this woman happily give drugs to their kids safe in the knowledge they'll only get a few weeks in prison then be back on benefits. But that's just my opinion...We clashed on my underage pregnancies policies didn't we?

 

 

 

caligula: nomen omen est

 

I can't help but get the feeling that, despite you having done drugs, you know very little academic information about drugs and drug use.

 

 

 

The longer i study philosophy (on the university of vienna) the stronger my grudge with academic/scientific information becomes.

 

I can't help but get the feeling that, despite you having done drugs, you know very little academic information about drugs and drug use.

 

 

 

The longer i study philosophy (on the univeristy of vienna) the stronger my grudge with academic/scientific information becomes.

 

 

 

You clearly haven't studied philosophy very long then. Maybe you need to study a little more. For instance, the first philosophers of the Western world - the pre-Socractics - do you happent to know what kind of philosophy they concerneed themselves with?

 

 

 

Isaac Newton - you know him as a famous scientist, do you happen to know what he was actually referred to as when he was living?

 

 

 

I think you need to study philosophy a little longer before making claims like that. I also wouldn't recommend making terribly asburd claims about philosophy when responding to something a philosophy major said (that would be me). Your comment was...above all else...silly.

Uhm.. yes i do know what the natural philosphers where concerned with. Hardly know anything about Newtons philosophy though.

 

 

 

I don't have the slightest idea how my knowledge about pre socratians and Newton disqualifies my statement about the credibility of academic knowledge in general. I just pointed out, that regardless of wether i have much "academic information" about drugs or not (which might be the case or not), i came to the conclusion that (imo) academics are vastly overrated. I pointed out that i study philosophy, to make it believable that my claim isn't just emotional, but the product of many a thought instead.

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: Now that i think about it the common concept amongst natural philosphers about deriving theories from observation actually fits into the context, because i have observed the subject "drugs" very closely. What i hoped for was somebody asking for more details, to get a more sophisticated opinion. But no! Somehow there is always unneccessary arguing.

I do philosophy at A level (therby a lesser extent to which others here have studied), but I do not see how Newton can still be clasified as a philosopher - it once would have meant, and would have been used in terms of, one who loves learning - (philos meaning loving, sophos meaning wise/sage/wisdom). Surely this appelation can be applied with verascity to Newton. However, the modern conotations of the word differ greatly, so that Newton would no longer be classified as a Philospher, but as a scientist.

 

 

 

However, many great thinkers derive thier philosophy from observation and espress it in absolute terms - Aristotle and MacIntyre being key examples of thinkers attacking relativism.

 

 

 

Ghost's point seems rather outmoded, in that academics often base thier opinions on derived knowledge rather than observed knowledge - few academics will have "speed-balled", and can only indierectly understand it. There is a weakness in academic knowledge for some people, and that is not the correct way to attack that assertion, though I agree with Ghost in that I tend to place more value in academic reasoning that others do.

^ I wrote a really long post explaining how clear it is that you all have very little knowledge (or true beliefs, if you will) about natural philosophy and its relation to science. But then I thought to myself, screw it. No use arguing with people who claim to know things they clearly don't. You all are a disgrace to philosophy.

^ I wrote a really long post explaining how clear it is that you all have very little knowledge (or true beliefs, if you will) about natural philosophy and its relation to science. But then I thought to myself, screw it. No use arguing with people who claim to know things they clearly don't. You all are a disgrace to philosophy.

 

 

 

:shock:

 

:cry:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yah let's leave this discussion be. Waste of energy for all involved.

Strange woman...

 

Makes me wonder how people like that are allowed to look after their kids in the first place.

 

Jail for her and foster home for the kids if you ask me. \

^^^You have any idea how crap foster homes are?They are probably worse in America.I do drugs,its not something I shout out in the streets,I am just admitting it because this is an interenet forum,what are you going to do about it?Stare disaprovingly at the screen?I bet about 70-80% of this forum has taken some kind of drug before now,whether it be paracetemol or heroin (I dont touch anything harder than pills btw).Drugs aren't bad,they help alot of people with problems,the only reason most of them are illegal is because people misuse them.i disagree with junkies, people that live just for drugs,and just because I do drugs doesnt mean I need them,I do go for ages without them and I'm fine.But drugs to kids makes me feel sick.

Well yeah i do know what foster homes are like because my mom works at youth hostels and a lot of the kids there have been fostered in the past and to most of the kids who live there, hostels and fostering is like a beaming ray of light from the heavens.

 

Most people foster out of the goodness of their heart or their inability to have their own kids.

 

I'm sure at 12 years old they'd be better off there than with their mom shoving class a's in their face.

 

Or in jail. When they can't legally live on their own. :-k

^^^You have any idea how crap foster homes are?They are probably worse in America.I do drugs,its not something I shout out in the streets,I am just admitting it because this is an interenet forum,what are you going to do about it?Stare disaprovingly at the screen?I bet about 70-80% of this forum has taken some kind of drug before now,whether it be paracetemol or heroin (I dont touch anything harder than pills btw).Drugs aren't bad,they help alot of people with problems,the only reason most of them are illegal is because people misuse them.i disagree with junkies, people that live just for drugs,and just because I do drugs doesnt mean I need them,I do go for ages without them and I'm fine.But drugs to kids makes me feel sick.

 

I took some pills this morning.

 

Tylanol can do wonders for aches and pains

 

I can't help but get the feeling that, despite you having done drugs, you know very little academic information about drugs and drug use.

 

 

 

The longer i study philosophy (on the university of vienna) the stronger my grudge with academic/scientific information becomes.

 

 

 

Quite of a few of the greatest philosophers were also extremely accomplished mathemeticians.

 

 

 

For example...

 

I can't help but get the feeling that, despite you having done drugs, you know very little academic information about drugs and drug use.

 

 

 

The longer i study philosophy (on the university of vienna) the stronger my grudge with academic/scientific information becomes.

 

 

 

Quite of a few of the greatest philosophers were also extremely accomplished mathemeticians.

 

 

 

Plato, for instance, is still studied by mathematicians today. As Burtrand Russell said, "All modern philosophy is just a footnote to Plato."

 

 

 

Can't be much greater of a philosopher than that...

 

I can't help but get the feeling that, despite you having done drugs, you know very little academic information about drugs and drug use.

 

 

 

The longer i study philosophy (on the university of vienna) the stronger my grudge with academic/scientific information becomes.

 

 

 

Quite of a few of the greatest philosophers were also extremely accomplished mathemeticians.

 

 

 

Plato, for instance, is still studied by mathematicians today. As Burtrand Russell said, "All modern philosophy is just a footnote to Plato."

 

 

 

Can't be much greater of a philosopher than that...

 

 

 

You're too fast :P I just edited in an example (descartes & calculus)

Yeah i guess anything is better than having cocaine at the age of 12.

 

Out of marls i would puh for the death penalty for that mother,

Yeah i guess anything is better than having cocaine at the age of 12.

 

Out of marls i would puh for the death penalty for that mother,

 

 

 

Actually, it's probably the best thing ever compared to being starved at the age of 12, like (sadly) many of the kids that age in the world are. Those kids weren't starving though and even if their mother had no common sense, why do you think a judge would ever sentence her to death? She is still after all the mother of those children. Where does it even say the kids are mad at their mother? (Though, they should be because cocaine is not a drug you can easily get away from)

 

 

 

Too many people are brainwashed (partially it's a positive thing) into believing the ultimate evilness of drugs. It is often considered worse than murder or rape. Even if a human being uses drugs, it doesn't lower his status as a human. I'd rather feel sorry for him than hate him/her.