Question

...
Rationalissimo

Is The Ultimate Law of Philosophy a Fallacy?

When I first encountered this so-called "Ultimate Law" I questioned it immediately but now I think about our finite limitations to consider such concepts as reality or existence or ect.

I have questions of my own that neither logic or math can solve to my satisfaction but take comfort from paradoxes.

 

asked on Friday, Feb 19, 2021 12:36:27 AM by Rationalissimo

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments

...
0
account no longer exists writes:

Of course, I realize logic is only the guide posts and math can justify unconfirmed realites. 

posted on Friday, Feb 19, 2021 12:48:11 AM
...
0
Citizen Irrelevant writes:
[To Robert W. Armijo]

I am with Dr Richard:  please do not assume your readers know what you are referring to?  Define this "Ultimate Law"?  Prima facia, I am skeptical of anything which would presume to be the penultimate authority of a subject matter which has filled volumes over the centuries.

I discovered something referred to as the Ultimate Law of Life, which has as key tenet the following descriptor: " Removing the illusion of death illuminates the absolute joy of life in the mundane world..." Is this what you may be referring to?  Please provide your specific reference so that we might better respond?  Thank you, Robert.

[ login to reply ] posted on Friday, Feb 19, 2021 01:43:11 PM
...
0
Rationalissimo writes:

The phrasing of your question, and your responses, imply that you're not fully sure of what you're talking about. Maybe think about what this 'ultimate law' is supposed to look like, then make another post?

posted on Saturday, Feb 20, 2021 07:19:57 AM
...
0
Rationalissimo writes:
[To Rationalissimo]

Imply or infer?

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2021 03:46:45 AM
...
0
Rationalissimo writes:

I am as certain as the fictional on board AI computer of the  H.A. L. 9000 series character in the movie 2001. 

https://youtu.be/CD9YqdWwwdw

 

 

 

posted on Sunday, Feb 21, 2021 01:06:48 AM

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Reason: Books I & II

This book is based on the first five years of The Dr. Bo Show, where Bo takes a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter with the goal of educating and entertaining. Every chapter in the book explores a different aspect of reason by using a real-world issue or example.

Part one is about how science works even when the public thinks it doesn't. Part two will certainly ruffle some feathers by offering a reason- and science-based perspective on issues where political correctness has gone awry. Part three provides some data-driven advice for your health and well-being. Part four looks at human behavior and how we can better navigate our social worlds. In part five we put on our skeptical goggles and critically examine a few commonly-held beliefs. In the final section, we look at a few ways how we all can make the world a better place.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book

Answers

...
Dr. Richard
1

I don't understand what you mean by "Ultimate Law." I searched online but did not find anything that might be appropriate to your question. 

answered on Friday, Feb 19, 2021 11:10:31 AM by Dr. Richard

Dr. Richard Suggested These Categories

Comments

...
0
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:

I never heard of this either.

posted on Friday, Feb 19, 2021 01:30:36 PM
...
0
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:
[To Bo Bennett, PhD]

What a situation we find ourselves in ladies and gentlemen tonight.

When the inquiry: judge and jury one in the same of presides over Jung's "Old Man" who can't find the text in an old book he read as a young man; and yet younger men sit in judgment of him who cannot find evidence to refute his claim on the internet -- You know I am kidding you, right?

Sorry. I grow too passionate on occasions at times like these -- It's the young Greek Philosophy in me (I said Philosophy), which makes me grow on the outside too. 

Again, sorry. This is much too easy. 

 

[ login to reply ] posted on Saturday, Feb 20, 2021 12:34:50 AM
...
0
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:

I am not surprised. I came accross it in one my p books on philosophy published, so long ago.

I remember the definition as being that one cannot argue a point beyond the known epistemological networks and thus the ultimate law of philosophy.

I believe it was used by the logical positivism camp. I remember thinking they engaged in character assasination, comparing Philosophy to mere poetry -- Given what one (name skips my mind) of the ancient philosophers thought about poetry and satire.

Did not know the term has disappeared. Must be out of lack of use. 

 

posted on Friday, Feb 19, 2021 09:45:05 PM
...
0
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:

Just poking a little fun out of all of you.

posted on Saturday, Feb 20, 2021 12:51:43 AM
...
0
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:

But not just about Ultimate Law of Philosophy -- I am concerned too now that no one outside of me knows about it;  or live that can recall it by either memory or by libratarian.

Still, I cannot pass up the moment to note the irony. 

 

 

posted on Saturday, Feb 20, 2021 04:02:11 AM
...
0
Bo Bennett, PhD writes:

[To Robert W. Armijo]

I am not what you think is "too easy" here or how you are "poking fun" at us. You referenced some obscure idea once written in a book. Perhaps you can elaborate.

[ login to reply ] posted on Saturday, Feb 20, 2021 07:43:46 AM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:

Ah, now I understand. It fits well with one of my favorite philosophers: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.”

posted on Saturday, Feb 20, 2021 09:51:14 AM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:
[To Dr. Richard]

Thank you for comments.

It all depends on who's sitting up on the wall. 

 

[ login to reply ] posted on Monday, Feb 22, 2021 11:09:37 PM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:
[To Robert W. Armijo]

I do not understand your comment. Sorry.

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2021 09:11:33 AM
...
Kaiden
0

Hi, Robert W. Armijo!

An Ultimate Law of Philosophy sounds very controversial, but very intriguing.

Keep in mind, however, that a statement alone cannot commit a logical fallacy in the sense of being a mistake in reasoning that prevents an argument from fulfilling its rational persuasive task. A logical fallacy occurs in the course of an argument or inference . So far, one cannot argue a point beyond the known epistemological networks is a lone statement. Do you not recall the argument in which the Ultimate Law was situated? Supposing you don’t, this knowledge might be lost forever, since besides you there are none alive who can even recall the Ultimate Law itself. In the meantime, as an echo to your comments towards the logically fallacious community, may we poke a little fun at you for your lack of preparation in submitting this Question? Once you provide us with the argument in which the Law was situated, we can get to work on answering your post with a view towards whether any fallacies have been committed. For example, was the Ultimate Law intended to work alongside other premises to support a refutation of the meaningfulness of metaphysical claims?

Thank you, Robert.

From, Kaiden

answered on Monday, Feb 22, 2021 08:53:56 PM by Kaiden

Kaiden Suggested These Categories

Comments

...
0
Dr. Richard writes:

Thank you, Kaiden.

"The Ultimate Law of Philosophy" is what I read in a book somewhere on my journey through this life and not a conclusion of my own manufacturing.

 Yet, I like your style.

I think and write in a shorthand just as you 

I don't think my final fermantation of an arguement before this symposium will be metaphysical at all.

I have read many old books and still do to this day. And I am discovering that, that knowledge is not being transcribed onto the interwebs. And if, so deleted -- Now so quickly deleating...

I guess, you will have to trust me; or more importantly see in your mind's eye an Idea that I have implanted in your brain to answer your question you asked of me. 

 

 

 

posted on Monday, Feb 22, 2021 10:30:44 PM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:
[To Robert W. Armijo]

 By the way, have  you found a single document on The Ultimate Law of Philosophy, yet?

Don't bother, if you can't. Because beyond Dewey nobody can.

 

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2021 02:30:35 AM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:

That is because boys and girls we are divided by zero.

posted on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2021 03:42:47 AM
...
1
Kaiden writes:

[To Robert W. Armijo]

You write, “’The Ultimate Law of Philosophy’ is what I read in a book somewhere on my journey through this life and not a conclusion of my own manufacturing.”

      I did not attribute the Ultimate Law of Philosophy to you. (I saw you explain to Dr. Bennett that it comes from an old philosophy book.)

You write, “I don't think my final fermantation of an arguement before this symposium will be metaphysical at all.”

      Hold on now, Robert. My question was about the argument that the old philosophy book was making, not about the argument that you would like to make. You asked us about any fallacies that might be going on regarding the Law. My point is that you will have to settle with “no fallacies” as an answer unless you revisit that book and provide us with the exact argument in which the Law was situated.

You write, “…have you found a single document on The Ultimate Law of Philosophy, yet?”

      Since the term has all but disappeared, our research regarding the Ultimate Law consists precisely in bringing our inquiries to you . But what has your reading of old texts amounted to, and what is it worth to be the last person who can recall the text, if you cannot so much as clearly communicate basic facts about it, such as the argument it contained? Again, without the associated argument, you will have to settle for “no fallacies” as an answer.

      Are you fine with settling for “no fallacies” or would you like us to do more? If you want us to do more, then there are brilliant individuals like Dr. Bennett, Dr. Richard, Citizen Irrelevant, and Rationalissimo who are waiting to help you with this very intriguing topic, but you will have to work with us instead of trying to reach our minds through brain implantations and unclear phrases such as “That is because boys and girls we are divided by zero.”

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2021 11:12:38 AM
...
0
Kaiden writes:

I must say I really like you because you're filled or fedup with questions I have asked myself in my dreams over and over again.

Please, forgive me for asking you th question: Is your faith in God  Muslim faith? Because, I can't find a trace of it in my own fault or faith except when he qutioned the purpose of his own death up on the cross

 

 

 

 

 

posted on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2021 10:45:05 PM
...
1
Kaiden writes:

[To Robert W. Armijo]

“Please, forgive me for asking you th question: Is your faith in God  Muslim faith?”

Apparently, you are supposing that I have faith in God; the question is then about whether my faith is Islamic. I get a kick out of both the supposition and the question. But I haven’t the faintest idea where the supposition is coming from, nor why the question is being put to me, nor why I should address either of these (I eventually learned, you see, that Dr. Bennett runs a tight ship.) Is there something relevant to fallacies that you would like to talk about or evaluate, such as an argument from the old book that incorporates the Ultimate Law of Philosophy?

[ login to reply ] posted on Saturday, Feb 27, 2021 08:12:18 PM
...
0
Kaiden writes:

Tight ship...

So, please forgive me for quentioning the crew before signing up with the lot of you.

posted on Sunday, Feb 28, 2021 06:07:28 AM
...
0
Kaiden writes:

As Americans, we're alll haunting down Herman's white whale.

posted on Sunday, Feb 28, 2021 06:23:06 AM