View Poll Results: Mmm?

Voters
2. You may not vote on this poll
  • I'm a liberal, liberals are coherentists.

    0 0%
  • I'm a liberal, liberals are foundationalists.

    1 50.00%
  • I'm not a liberal, liberals are coherentists.

    0 0%
  • I'm not a liberal, liberals are foundationalists.

    1 50.00%
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 71

Thread: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

  1. #11
    Revolutionary
    TNAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,018
    Blog Entries
    17

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    I wish one of the words that I made up would catch on... I'm thinking if any of them will, it will be Demoblican.

  2. #12
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    26,111

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by TNAR View Post
    I wish one of the words that I made up would catch on... I'm thinking if any of them will, it will be Demoblican.
    These are real words, it's just that the OP doesn't understand how to use them properly. This is unsurprising as he's only two weeks into his Logics and Ethics foundation course.

    P.S. Demoblican sounds great. Any chance of a definition? And one for Demoblican't, while you're at it.
    Last edited by Andalublue; 07-09-12 at 09:54 AM.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  3. #13
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    OK, so you're saying concrete necessity?

    What happens when multiple parties have conflicting concrete necessities, or we're talking about concrete luxuries instead?
    Your mixing 2 different ways of using the word "necessity," your talking about material necessities in the second sentance, I'm talking about systemic necessities in first ...

    Oh, I agree. Many conservative depend on virtue ethics instead of categorical judgment for defining right and wrong.

    You don't want to call those axioms though. They're maxims.
    So do Leftists ... the difference is Leftists don't pretend that these are axioms (i.e. given and universal foundational truth), right wingers do.

    Take all the so called "virtues" that go along with property, rightists simply take these as axiomatic, i.e. self justifying, Leftists generally look at these with a historical backdrop and make sure these are justified.

  4. #14
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    When one's heart and mind are full of hatred - in this case -"liberals" , then a man cannot think and reason with any good results.
    Try the open mind philosophy. . . .
    "Liberals as tyrants" This can happen to anyone - of course.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    Your mixing 2 different ways of using the word "necessity," your talking about material necessities in the second sentance, I'm talking about systemic necessities in first...
    Yes, there's a difference between material and systemic necessities...

    ...but systems require interpretation. No child interprets a system before being born, so no authority can be granted.

    Therefore, only material necessity is left.

    So do Leftists ... the difference is Leftists don't pretend that these are axioms (i.e. given and universal foundational truth), right wingers do.

    Take all the so called "virtues" that go along with property, rightists simply take these as axiomatic, i.e. self justifying, Leftists generally look at these with a historical backdrop and make sure these are justified.
    No, I very much disagree. Leftists believe equality is an axiom, ignoring how everyone isn't the same.

    You even proved this just now in referring to "historical backdrop". There's nothing universal in nature that tells us how far back, or to what detail, we should evaluate events that happened, nor does nature doesn't tell us where to go in the future.

  6. #16
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,595
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    You got that far? Kudos...
    Another word for prejudice ?
    Or just impatience...
    I find the Dak character to be interesting - in a way..

  7. #17
    Revolutionary
    TNAR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    02-05-17 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,018
    Blog Entries
    17

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andalublue
    These are real words
    I'll assume they are highly specialized words since they are not included in any typical dictionary that I've bothered to check. This isn't surprising, of course, virtually every field has multitudes of terms which do not get included in regional vernacular.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andalublue
    Demoblican sounds great. Any chance of a definition? And one for Demoblican't, while you're at it.
    Haha... Demoblican't. I like it!

    Demoblican [dem-uhb-li-kuhn] noun: a person who claims adherence to either the Democratic or Republican Party but who exhibits the ideological actions of both party lines.

  8. #18
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Yes, there's a difference between material and systemic necessities...

    ...but systems require interpretation. No child interprets a system before being born, so no authority can be granted.

    Therefore, only material necessity is left.
    Errr, no, I'm saying if you want to get somethign done, you need a system, and if authority is to be part of that it needs to be justified ...

    Your being incoherant here ...

    No, I very much disagree. Leftists believe equality is an axiom, ignoring how everyone isn't the same.
    No we don't ... equality in rights, yes, not ONE leftists believes in material equality.

    You even proved this just now in referring to "historical backdrop". There's nothing universal in nature that tells us how far back, or to what detail, we should evaluate events that happened, nor does nature doesn't tell us where to go in the future.
    What tells us what to evaluate is logic and reason ...

    This is pertty simple stuff, for example you have a phenomenon, and you find all the historical things that are likely to have caused or be related to that phenomenon, and then you evaluate it ....

    This isn't hard.

    I get your trying to be a philosopher here, but you need to be coherant.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    Errr, no, I'm saying if you want to get somethign done, you need a system, and if authority is to be part of that it needs to be justified ...

    Your being incoherant here ...
    ...so how is a parent's authority over a child justified? Children are created before saying they want to be.

    No we don't ... equality in rights, yes, not ONE leftists believes in material equality.
    ...so why do leftists advocate redistributive justice?

    What tells us what to evaluate is logic and reason ...

    This is pertty simple stuff, for example you have a phenomenon, and you find all the historical things that are likely to have caused or be related to that phenomenon, and then you evaluate it ....

    This isn't hard.

    I get your trying to be a philosopher here, but you need to be coherant.
    OK, we're getting somewhere now.

    I agree that logic and reason are important, but these are concepts based on foundations, not cohesion. When we ask if elements are members of a set, we ask if elements have characteristics, not if elements are similar to other elements.

    Again, there is nothing in nature that tells us how similar things need to be to qualify as sufficient.

    Are you saying people have to be confident in deciding how far to investigate likely causes?

  10. #20
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Are Liberals Coherentists or Foundationalists?

    ...so how is a parent's authority over a child justified? Children are created before saying they want to be.
    Its justified by the fact that children without parents would probably die and not be able to develop.

    ...so why do leftists advocate redistributive justice?
    Because we don't believe that Capitalism rewards merit and that it increases economic inequality without justification and to remedy that and to have a functioning economy you have to fix that.

    I don't advocate redistributive justice, I advocate changing the entire economic framework.

    I agree that logic and reason are important, but these are concepts based on foundations, not cohesion. When we ask if elements are members of a set, we ask if elements have characteristics, not if elements are similar to other elements.
    Sure ... As I said, its not black and white.

    I would say that logic and reason are true axioms.

    Again, there is nothing in nature that tells us how similar things need to be to qualify as sufficient.

    Are you saying people have to be confident in deciding how far to investigate likely causes?
    The "thing in nature" is reason ...

    What your arguing is essencially saying that science is impossible ... I deny that, I say that there are perfectly rational ways to show how things are related.

    Are these based on axiomatic foundations? Yeah ... Reason and logic ...

    The fact is your entire OP was a false dictomy and a strawman.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •