INTERVIEW FOR CSE 2019
All ForumIAS members selected for CSE 2019 Personality Test must submit their details and DAF and register below to receive further instructions and guidance from ForumIAS. Click here to register now
INTERVIEW 2020 CHANNEL
ForumIAS Channel for Interview Preparation is now Active! Please join the channel by clicking here
We are hiring!

Philosophy 2017 doubts,discussions and answer writing

1910111214

Comments

  • Can anyone elucidate to me the structure/answer of this question:

    Q. Examine Kant's criticism on Descartes' view of self. (CSE 2016, 5M)
    @Chomuphilosopher @yoga123 You guys have already appeared for mains. Kindly shed some light.
  • Please clarify: Wittgenstein do not accept universal, negative & intentional facts but has he accepted universal, negative & intentional propositions?
    Wittgenstein has accepted all the mentioned propositions but he has accepted only particular fact, positive factand has also denied intentional fact due to his strict commitment to Ockham razor. Hope it clears
  • edited February 2017
    https://disqus.com/home/channel/philosophyanswerwritingpractise/

    this is the daily answer writing practice group for philo
    how to participate in your discussion.

    I think its good that we make important keywords and short answers/concepts in three to four lines ie core point..so that later we have can build answer around it...
    please post some questions on bhudhism...
  • whatsapp group for philosophy
    mains 2014: 220/500
    mains 2015: 209/500
    uppsc mains : 226/400
    serious ppl join the group and lets discuss
    7827381072
  • Philo ka result mains mein kaisa raha
  • I had a doubt:

    Book: A critical history of western philosophy (Y. Masih)
    Topic: Ideas of Plato

    "If sensible is like idea, then idea too will be like sensible. In that case, another idea of likeness will be required to explain the first idea of likeness with the likeness in like things, participating in the idea. In other words, there is a third standard likeness with which to judge the two likenesses. Further, this 2nd pattern of likeness, will be required to explain the likeness of the second order. This will land into infinite regress."

    Can anyone simplify this? Difficult to comprehend.
  • Let me try to explain with a example.

    To explain :- cow and Buffalo are like, we need crtierion for likeness(A) i.e. two eyes on either side, big nostrils, four legs.(FIRST ORDER)

    Now one can ask what is likeness in "having four legs or eyes"(what is similarity)? Here we need SECOND ORDER CRITERION:- i.e. two front legs two back, having furs, black eyes etc.


    So you can see, we are going deeper into enquiry of likeness...which is infinite series...this is what is explained. This is similar to "fallacy of third man" as in samvaay of vaishesika.




    I had a doubt:

    Book: A critical history of western philosophy (Y. Masih)
    Topic: Ideas of Plato

    "If sensible is like idea, then idea too will be like sensible. In that case, another idea of likeness will be required to explain the first idea of likeness with the likeness in like things, participating in the idea. In other words, there is a third standard likeness with which to judge the two likenesses. Further, this 2nd pattern of likeness, will be required to explain the likeness of the second order. This will land into infinite regress."

    Can anyone simplify this? Difficult to comprehend.
  • edited March 2017
    I had a doubt:

    Book: A critical history of western philosophy (Y. Masih)
    Topic: Ideas of Plato

    "If sensible is like idea, then idea too will be like sensible. In that case, another idea of likeness will be required to explain the first idea of likeness with the likeness in like things, participating in the idea. In other words, there is a third standard likeness with which to judge the two likenesses. Further, this 2nd pattern of likeness, will be required to explain the likeness of the second order. This will land into infinite regress."

    Can anyone simplify this? Difficult to comprehend.
    This is third man fallacy. Plato discusses universal essence like manness in man. It is criticism of Plato that ur passage is referring to. It goes like this: ur manness if same as my manness require a third person to judge. And third person's manness is same to two of us require fourth man to judge. This goes on and on and ultimately leads to infinite regress.
Sign In or Join to comment.

Welcome!

We are a secret self-moderated community for Civil Services preparation. Feel free to join, start a discussion, answer a question or just to say Thank you.

Just dont spread the word ;)

Sign in or join with Facebook or Google