Sign up and stay connected to your favorite communities.

sign uplog in
5
Stickied postModerator of r/philosophy

Welcome to this week's Open Discussion Thread. This thread is a place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but wouldn't necessarily meet our posting rules (especially PR2). For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Arguments that aren't substantive enough to meet PR2.

  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. who your favourite philosopher is, what you are currently reading

  • Philosophical questions. Please note that /r/askphilosophy is a great resource for questions and if you are looking for moderated answers we suggest you ask there.

This thread is not a completely open discussion! Any posts not relating to philosophy will be removed. Please keep comments related to philosophy, and expect low-effort comments to be removed. All of our normal commenting rules are still in place for these threads, although we will be more lenient with regards to CR2.

Previous Open Discussion Threads can be found here.

2

At my Home:

I will always put the toilet seat down and here are a few reasons

- I don't want to drop things in the toilet (I even put the lid down)

- I know it makes people who sit to pee happy

- I want guests to think I'm a good person :)

At a public Restroom:

I always leave the seat up and here are a few reasons

- I don't want to splash pee on the seat

- I don't want others to splash on the seat with their pee

- I want the next person to sit on the toilet seat to know the seat was previously out of the way of the pee

- I don't want any people waiting outside to think I'm the creator of the dried pee on the seat

Now, this is why I'm posting this in r/Philosophy. I feel this could be relatable to many other aspects of life and human behavior. I wish I could just put the toilet seat down in good faith and rely on my fellow humans to follow suit. But if you have ever used a men's or coed bathroom at a public place, you know this isn't the case.

It's kind of sad how much power the few "non-lifters" have over the majority of "lifters." Expounding upon this, it's almost as if the metaphorical "non-lifters" in society force the rest of society, the "lifters," to live according to their ways or face the consequences of a pee covered seat.

2
comment
1

Can you disprove/debunk this rationalist argument?

I encourage you guys to debate with each other, try to point out fallacies in this debate...

a.

  1. Filters are anyway of perception a being has to view or interact with the external world.

  2. If there is an objective unfiltered reality, we cannot perceive it without a filter.

  3. Perception can be manipulated.

  4. A manipulated perception is no closer to perceiving an objective reality, than a non manipulated perception.

5.Hence perceived reality cannot be trusted when trying to find information about an objective reality.

b.

1.Rationale is the power of the mind to think, using the process of logic.

ex. Made up Law: If A= B +C, than A≠ B

  1. According to argument A, reality can not be experienced unfiltered.

  2. In order for reality to be filtered there needs to be a filterer or a perceiver.

  3. Hence, the only fact that can get you closer to revealing an objective reality or "truth" is the fact you exist.

1
comment