More Philosophy and Superbowl

So, I want to say for the record….Rob was wrong….he predicted 17-10 Carolina, and he was ridiculously wrong….my prediction….Rob would be wrong….so I’m awesome, and Rob sux. There was Fat Man dancing at each touchdown and sack. Rob and I decided just because we like to hate each other and because we didn’t care who one that he would root for Carolina, since he had picked them to win already anyway, and I got the Patriots. To be honest it could have been anyones game, and we didn’t really care either way, but my team came out on top, so I was happy. But at one point after a Carolina touchdown an especially exciting dance was performed. Rob started his patented “Dance of Infinite Joy” and he rocked too far to one side, and he started to go over…luckily our other friend Rob caught him before he took out the coffee table. So I have renamed Rob from “Smelly” to “Humpty” because he did a great dance and had a great fall and sooner or later all of us are going to have to put him back together again. This was quite a moment…this marks the second time Rob has almost taken out the table. So Humpty will be his name until I think of a new one, or a better one.

So in philosophy class, which is awesome, they were talking about relativism and I had some really interesting thoughts. I believe that I have proven that if we accept the statement “I think therefore I am” that Descartes stated that other people do exist and that I don’t like a lot of them. While most people reading this are thinking one of two things (one, duh…isn’t that obvious, or two, duh,…many a philosopher has proven that) I was impressed with myself. This was slightly better then the time I stated that the Church needed periods of movements and periods of establishments, and then read the same thing in a book by some important guy. I like the philosophy class, it makes me think, and while I don’t always think that thinking for it’s own sake is a good thing, sometimes it is. Oh my ,I’ve just gone cross-eyed.

Anyway, I might post how I work out this whole thing about other people existing,…but lets just say that it doesn’t account for that whole theory that we might just be figments of some other beings imagination….which sounds slightly like a heresy of the actual revealed truth in the Bible. But sometime…after I form a more complete thought on this, I will use it to philosophically prove that God exists. I already made an argument for that today, but it was rough, and easily picked apart, but it is the start of a thought that could be more complete and difficult to disprove.

Also, later tonight I will have a link to pictures of the prime toy in various poses, so you can all laugh at the silly poses and marvel at how awesome the toy is.

So with that I will say, Thank you, and Goodnight.

  1. I’m not sure I believe in your hermeneutic of truth. Well, maybe it’s not yours. Maybe it’s the philosophers.

    I believe all truth is relatively apprehended. This does not necessarily mean all truth IS subjective. Some truth could be objective in nature, some subjective, some “truths” could objectively false.

    But this has some unfortunate existantialist consequences in my apprehension of truth. It does not put me in a place to doubt all things (thankfully), but in a place to doubt some. Thus I tend to suspect objective proofs like the one raised by Descartes. It certainly has the ring of truth to it. But it doesn’t extend past humanity very well. Animals don’t think the way we do. Are they real. What about the possibility of supernatural beings. Do they think? Or are their thought fully consistent with their actions, like God, or a fully sanctified human? Is it then fair to say that they think?

    Well, that should throw some wrenches in the gears. Sorry.

Comments are closed.