Wow, this was just utterly engaging. I was on the edge of my seat [metaphorically speaking] as i heard each situation and each outcome. What would you say is your techneé? Personally, I can't find one, I always seem find too much overlap with other things . Having said that, perhapse my inability to specify, is in a sence an abuility to generalise. Or more accurately the inability to single out, is an abuility to lump together, to parallel, or see similarity in function. But then saying that, I've singled out the abuility to "conect/combine", and seem to have disproven my thesis that " I can not single out" Ahm, alright, for the sake of not going into an infinite regress, I'll stop at that. ( also, the idea of the dilemma of circular logic vs infinite regress is something i finally understood clearly, after listening to your videos on John Rawls, and in particular one of the last in that playlist when you specifically discussed John's aproach to grounding his principles of justice, whare he concluded with using a dialectical aproach, which honestly, I still need some more context in order to understand the function of what " dialectical " is) Anyway, I find your presentations and interpretations of thease works extremely illuminating, and full of what to me are practical philosophical concepts. To my way of thinking, It is very difficult to make choices without a proper moral framework, and so far, I've not found satisfactory results, but I have found useful guidelines for everyday use, since the "battle" is in the everyday existence as I see it . Since I make this too long, I'll repeat my question: "What Is your techneé?" If you have the time to answer of course. This time anyway for real Have a good day
I am glad that you find the presentations interesting and helpful. When presenting, I try to find and elucidate what I take to be the author's key presuppositions. Much cheer, Dr. F
Wow, this was just utterly engaging. I was on the edge of my seat [metaphorically speaking] as i heard each situation and each outcome.
What would you say is your techneé?
Personally, I can't find one, I always seem find too much overlap with other things .
Having said that, perhapse my inability to specify, is in a sence an abuility to generalise.
Or more accurately the inability to single out, is an abuility to lump together, to parallel, or see similarity in function.
But then saying that, I've singled out the abuility to "conect/combine", and seem to have disproven my thesis that " I can not single out"
Ahm, alright, for the sake of not going into an infinite regress, I'll stop at that.
( also, the idea of the dilemma of circular logic vs infinite regress is something i finally understood clearly, after listening to your videos on John Rawls, and in particular one of the last in that playlist when you specifically discussed John's aproach to grounding his principles of justice, whare he concluded with using a dialectical aproach, which honestly, I still need some more context in order to understand the function of what " dialectical " is)
Anyway, I find your presentations and interpretations of thease works extremely illuminating, and full of what to me are practical philosophical concepts.
To my way of thinking, It is very difficult to make choices without a proper moral framework, and so far, I've not found satisfactory results, but I have found useful guidelines for everyday use, since the "battle" is in the everyday existence as I see it .
Since I make this too long, I'll repeat my question:
"What Is your techneé?" If you have the time to answer of course.
This time anyway for real
Have a good day
I am glad that you find the presentations interesting and helpful. When presenting, I try to find and elucidate what I take to be the author's key presuppositions. Much cheer, Dr. F