By that logic financial regulation is philosophy too but that makes the original comparison of financial regulation to philosophy non sensical. You’re shifting the terminology beneath out feet.
Law is downstream of philosophy. Youre forced to deal with conclusions that may be based in philosophy (or they may be arbitrary or self interested). Nobody makes you hold a position on mens rea. In that way you can ignore the philosophy.
I don’t think I understand what you’re trying to say.
In the literal sense, people have been forcing their philosophy on other people for at least as long as we’ve had societies, so I assume it’s not that.
Arent you disagreeing with yourself? You say these people are just now wrestling with the question of what intelligence is despite it being a longstanding philosophical question. So it clearly wasn’t forced on them.
No I’m not because the philosophy of intelligence is a tiny subset of philosophy more broadly, which is what the above comment said. And what makes the current discussions farcical is not that the philosophy wasn’t forced on them, nor that their reasoning is invalid; it’s that when they did decide to consider it, they don’t have the awareness to first seek out the prior art.
I myself was held prisoner by John Searle for 20 years, my only contact with the outside world by notes slipped under the door written in Chinese - a language I do not speak.
Yeah it is. It's called law. For example: when is intent important or a mitigating factor in a crime? When is it not important. Very philosophical.
By that logic financial regulation is philosophy too but that makes the original comparison of financial regulation to philosophy non sensical. You’re shifting the terminology beneath out feet.
Law is downstream of philosophy. Youre forced to deal with conclusions that may be based in philosophy (or they may be arbitrary or self interested). Nobody makes you hold a position on mens rea. In that way you can ignore the philosophy.
I don’t think I understand what you’re trying to say.
In the literal sense, people have been forcing their philosophy on other people for at least as long as we’ve had societies, so I assume it’s not that.
Arent you disagreeing with yourself? You say these people are just now wrestling with the question of what intelligence is despite it being a longstanding philosophical question. So it clearly wasn’t forced on them.
No I’m not because the philosophy of intelligence is a tiny subset of philosophy more broadly, which is what the above comment said. And what makes the current discussions farcical is not that the philosophy wasn’t forced on them, nor that their reasoning is invalid; it’s that when they did decide to consider it, they don’t have the awareness to first seek out the prior art.
1 reply →
I myself was held prisoner by John Searle for 20 years, my only contact with the outside world by notes slipped under the door written in Chinese - a language I do not speak.
You take not being subjected to say Marxism-Leninism at every stage of your life for granted.