Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (229869)	5/5/2007 7:39:31 PM
From: neolib	Respond to of 281500

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I actually approve of humanism, it is a great step forward. But so were many of the philosophical systems which humanism attempts to replace. At one point they too were great steps forward. If humanism were to closely adhere to the stated premise, it would already be outdated by what we know of biology. That is my point. Philosophical premises don't seem very useful for the long haul. Why? The only philosophical system that seems to have worked is the philosophy of science, and even then the best description of that one is to keep you eyes open, your brain functioning, and to the best job you can at accurately exploring the universe. If other philosophies were to adopt similarly broad guidelines, they would end up having much longer useful lives. But you couldn't sit and discuss their nuances endlessly either, since they wouldn't have any.