Author Topic: Lawrence Krauss (Read 16292 times)

Gordon · « **Reply #100 on:** January 10, 2019, 07:22:50 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 07:18:24 PM

And yet you are happy to see the same arguments trotted out again and again on the searching for God thread. Looks like special pleading on your part.

Nope: just tolerance, Vlad - and recognition on my part that some topics are never really exhausted even where repetition is involved.

Walt Zingmatilder · « **Reply #101 on:** January 10, 2019, 07:27:21 PM »

Quote from: Gordon on January 10, 2019, 07:22:50 PM

Nope: just tolerance, Vlad - and recognition on my part that some topics are never really exhausted even where repetition is involved.

Nonsense.

jeremyp · « **Reply #102 on:** January 10, 2019, 07:27:50 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 06:22:54 PM

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3d8NthEFWow

He says "morality based on rationality". Don't you think it is a good idea to have a rational basis for your morality?

Gordon · « **Reply #103 on:** January 10, 2019, 07:50:47 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 07:27:21 PM

Nonsense.

Nope: I'd have thought that since SfG has over 34,000 posts and over 1.5 million views that would indicate that there is something in the various subjects that are addressed in the thread, however repetitious, that confirms that some topics can attract a substantial amount of long-term interest.

Walt Zingmatilder · « **Reply #104 on:** January 10, 2019, 07:55:18 PM »

Quote from: Gordon on January 10, 2019, 07:50:47 PM

Nope: I'd have thought that since SfG has over 34,000 posts and over 1.5 million views that would indicate that there is something in the various subjects that are addressed in the thread, however repetitious, that confirms that some topics can attract a substantial amount of long-term interest.

Argumentum ad populum.

Nearly Sane · « **Reply #105 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:01:00 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 07:55:18 PM

Argumentum ad populum.

No, it isn't. It isn't claiming facts are determined by numbers. It is just stating that SfG is comparatively popular. Factually that is true. BTW why are you detailing the thread from Krauss?

Walt Zingmatilder · « **Reply #106 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:05:41 PM »

Quote from: Nearly Sane on January 10, 2019, 08:01:00 PM

No, it isn't. It isn't claiming facts are determined by numbers. It is just stating that SfG is comparatively popular. Factually that is true. BTW why are you detailing the thread from Krauss?

Popularity is non sequitur to the point that it is repetitive. To criticise something else for repetition is special pleading therefore.

I don't understand your last question.

Gordon · « **Reply #107 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:09:07 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 07:55:18 PM

Argumentum ad populum.

No really: I'm just pointing out details that confirm the thread has attracted interest, and you can check the numbers yourself.

I'm making no assumptions about the relevance or value of content of SfG based on its popularity. Maybe you need to learn something of fallacies before you accuse others of committing them!

Nearly Sane · « **Reply #108 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:10:44 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 08:05:41 PM

Popularity is non sequitur to the point that it is repetitive. To criticise something else for repetition is special pleading therefore.

I don't understand your last question.

why are you derailing from the thread from the subject of Krauss.

Not sure what the rest of the post has to do with your incorrect statement about argumentum ad populum.

Gordon · « **Reply #109 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:12:21 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 08:05:41 PM

Popularity is non sequitur to the point that it is repetitive. To criticise something else for repetition is special pleading therefore.

No it isn't: that certain themes are repeated in SfG is an observation based on the content, such as frequently used terms.

Quote

I don't understand your last question.

Surely not!

Gordon · « **Reply #110 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:14:49 PM »

NS is right: this thread isn't about your misunderstanding of fallacies - it's about Krauss.

So, Vlad, what points about Krauss would you like to make (other that those you've already made)?

Walt Zingmatilder · « **Reply #111 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:21:32 PM »

Quote from: Gordon on January 10, 2019, 08:14:49 PM

NS is right: this thread isn't about your misunderstanding of fallacies - it's about Krauss.

So, Vlad, what points about Krauss would you like to make (other that those you've already made)?

I think the time is nearly ripe to explore Krauss's redefinition of the word "nothing". There I've given you guys a head start.

Walt Zingmatilder · « **Reply #112 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:24:53 PM »

Quote from: Gordon on January 10, 2019, 07:50:47 PM

Nope: I'd have thought that since SfG has over 34,000 posts and over 1.5 million views that would indicate that there is something in the various subjects that are addressed in the thread, however repetitious, that confirms that some topics can attract a substantial amount of long-term interest.

You mean like a car crash?

Gordon · « **Reply #113 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:27:01 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 08:21:32 PM

I think the time is nearly ripe to explore Krauss's redefinition of the word "nothing". There I've given you guys a head start.

Not really: that would be about science and/or philosophy whereas you started this thread on the topic of Krauss the person. So, can we conclude that you have nothing more to say about the person of Krauss and events involving him?

If so we can look forward to a new thread of yours on 'Science' with an OP that sets out a Kraussian start-point for a discussion of 'nothing' - over to you!

Nearly Sane · « **Reply #114 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:32:54 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 08:21:32 PM

I think the time is nearly ripe to explore Krauss's redefinition of the word "nothing". There I've given you guys a head start.

This seems unrelated to any of the allegations of sexual assault, or any relation to a philosophical stance, or assault in academia. You seem confused.

As to the question, Krauss's isn't a redefinition, it's a technical definition.

Nearly Sane · « **Reply #115 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:33:54 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 08:24:53 PM

You mean like a car crash?

No.

Walt Zingmatilder · « **Reply #116 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:50:10 PM »

Quote from: Gordon on January 10, 2019, 08:27:01 PM

Not really: that would be about science and/or philosophy whereas you started this thread on the topic of Krauss the person. So, can we conclude that you have nothing more to say about the person of Krauss and events involving him?

If so we can look forward to a new thread of yours on 'Science' with an OP that sets out a Kraussian start-point for a discussion of 'nothing' - over to you!

I would be more likely to discuss this as philosophy since to call it a science topic would mean we have unquestioningly accepted Krauss's linguistic imperialism and scientistical assumptions.

Walt Zingmatilder · « **Reply #117 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:51:46 PM »

Quote from: Nearly Sane on January 10, 2019, 08:32:54 PM

This seems unrelated to any of the allegations of sexual assault, or any relation to a philosophical stance, or assault in academia. You seem confused.

As to the question, Krauss's isn't a redefinition, it's a technical definition.

When interviewed by Colbert Krauss freely admitted redefinition.

Gordon · « **Reply #118 on:** January 10, 2019, 08:56:32 PM »

Quote from: Phyllis Tyne on January 10, 2019, 08:50:10 PM

I would be more likely to discuss this as philosophy since to call it a science topic would mean we have unquestioningly accepted Krauss's linguistic imperialism and scientistical assumptions.

Super: then you start a thread on 'Philosophy' and we'll see where it goes, and if it stays there or is more about science - time will tell.

Presumably then you've nothing more to say about the person of Krauss, so we can leave this thread to its own devices?