your example of roof jumping is science-like reasoning, not philosophy. common sense is science-like reasoning, not philosophy.
Paul didn't claim to be a contemporaneous witness obviously. He's irrelevant. Clearly whether Jesus existed or not there would have had to be a...
you should read up on the synoptic problem. there are almost no scholars who are taken seriously any more who would say the gospels (with the...
I think it's probable a man Jesus existed and at least in part was incorporated into NT stories, although there really is no way to be certain so...
grace? you're describing using science-like reasoning - making predictions based on past experience, if not strictly the scientific method (which as...
I don't distinguish between common sense and objectivity. I think any consensus on the validity or value of specific thoughts and ideas is reached...
who's philosophy? and how would you go about ruling by science? that seems nonsensical. again I don't think it's clear what exactly you are...
so did the Nazis when and where it does, each tends to view the other side's philosophy as misguided, and relying on philosophical considerations...
call it what you want. common sense is result of evolved instinct and experience. no philosophy involved.
there might be the intent of some sort of empirical hypothesis hidden in all the new age mumbo jumbo, but I doubt it. guy took too much of what he...
help is made by the spread of observation-driven common sense. people who are changing their views on this issue aren't all having simultaneous...
not a science quote
science doesn't say anything. it's just the tool you use to answer the question will it help.
Denny made a claim about the way things should be, not the way they are. I'm pointing out that the things we as a collective tend to agree on are...
whether we do or not is irrelevant. in the OP you're saying we're better off if we don't - and I don't get why. seems like you're completely...
"but you have to rule by some other means. Philosophy" finding a personal philosophy that suits your needs is a different thing than government...
in the sense that everyone does science, yes. categorically, no. obviously there's a lot of personal philosophy that colors individual politics....
an MD is not a scientist. i'm not familiar with this process so can't comment, but I don't see how this is relevant anyway. if there aren't enough...
slavery is the only thing you listed that would be a matter of emergent moral consensus, and there are socially beneficial reasons for that....
you can after you define what is and isn't. the point is we are NOT defining what is right and wrong collectively through philosophy. individuals...
Separate names with a comma.
