Hume is a badass. A beautful fatass badass. (The return of serious topic)

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

RE: Hume is a badass. A beautful fatass badass. (The return of serious topic)

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

Jason · Only in cartoons

That frame may be my favorite webcomic, if only because it describes me best. Oh, me. Why do I care?

cheeselover · I NEED BABIES!!!

That's not you. You would've gone to bed, slept for ten hours, and THEN corrected someone on the internet.

Jason · Only in cartoons

I've actually on occasion stayed up far later than I should only because I was in a heated internet discussion.

Also, I like the return of the serious topic.

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

I was in a similar debate such as this on another forum, but in smaller posts, going back and forth until I realized I had to goto school in another hour at 8AM.

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

And serious topics own. AND LOOK HOW MANY PEOPLE ENJOYED IT.

cheeselover · I NEED BABIES!!!

Jason wrote:

I've actually on occasion stayed up far later than I should only because I was in a heated internet discussion.

Also, I like the return of the serious topic.

.............

I can think of several occassions when you chose sleep over sex. I'm on to you, Jasno.....

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

Jasno, a lover in demand
Jasno, an unwilling lover.

Jason · Only in cartoons

Hey, I never said that I would universally choose to continue an intellectual discussion instead of going to bed. I'm just saying that it has happened.

I've also been known to stay up later for sex, so

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

I wanted to ask throughout the debate, because it is never clear to me; do you think Hume's problem of induction (and causality) is a statement of metaphysics or epistemology? Did Hume think causality itself was fallacious or human beings deriving anything from actions? Same with induction

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

Also, what do you think of Karl Popper's falsifiability claim, and that all science can actually be grounded in deduction?

Jason · Only in cartoons

The problem of induction, as far as I understand it, is incontrovertibly interpreted as an epistemological statement.

Historically, Hume has been interpreted as making a metaphysical denial of the "power" of causation. According to Hume, in this interpretation, causality JUST IS a relationship between events (one comes before the other, the other follows immediately from that one, etc.).

However, in the past 20-30 there has arisen a "New Hume" interpretation that takes Hume as being a causal Realist of sorts -- in other words, that causality does exist as a power some objects in the world have which bring their effects into being.

My interpretation (I read Hume extensively in school) agrees with the traditional view. I think the "New Hume" advocates are trying to find something in Hume that just isn't there. Their interpretation of causality may even be right (or something near it), but I do not think that it is truly Hume's interpretation.

Entire volumes have been written on Hume's theory of causality, and as mentioned above they have placed Hume all along the Realist/Anti-Realist spectrum.

Jason · Only in cartoons

DEATHPIGGIE wrote:

Also, what do you think of Karl Popper's falsifiability claim, and that all science can actually be grounded in deduction?

If I read Popper, it was too long ago for me to remember the details of his theory. Falsifiability is crucial to the scientific method, but I don't see how that makes science a deductive practice. In fact, science is abductive since it depends on intuitions (which are phrased in falsifiable hypothesis) which are then tested.

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

Leibniz is clearly the better looking fat early modern philosopher

Jason · Only in cartoons

He looks too much like Louis XIV of France.