================================================ Subject: Re: where Ewa is From: "creed -7m3 - live" To: Date: Fri 31 Aug 2001 23:26:14 -0400 ================================================ Welcome back Ewa, I was wondering where you were. For a moment. I thought that you asked the question and "left town". I'm glad that it was only to concentrate on your studies. I couldn't find "semantical". But assume that the meaning is categorized as assumptions. Or theories based upon suppositions. Rather than on concrete proofs. I think that philosophy is more based upon the taking of facts, then accounting for current suppositions, then bringing into account a freeflowing "moving around of the pieces of the puzzle." Without the "What If"s and challenging of ideas. We would probably be walking around, (no cars or beasts of burdens) eating raw meat (no fire harvesting), etc. Thanks for putting the meaning of pozdrawiam in parenthesis. Greetings to you also. Even "greetings" is subjective. But means as "may you prospher" Take Care, Jim ----- On Fri, 2001-08-31 at 18:23, fmn wrote: > hey, I'm right in front of my computer screen.. hehe (bad joke)... > anyway, I was busy with school - that's the reason why I didn't answer immediately. > > I personally think that the exceptional nature of a genius makes him being considered as insane by other (or let's say: average) people. > To come to speak of the definition of: "genius" and "insane", I pretty much agree with what everyone said. These are relative words, meaning that you need a perspective before you can actually define or evaluate them. And depending on the perspective you choose, those words can have different (even opposing) meanings. > And here's the real dilemma: the choice of perspective. Will it be from the point of view of the average or the genius? > Looking at this problem from an objective ("objective" in my opinion, of course - which already implies its subjectiveness;-) point of view comes close to how Jim described it: > (I'm quoting): "I think that the tradoff in being a "thicko" in certain areas. While being of exceptional perception in another area is part of being a genius." > And to answer Dawn DelliSanti's question (I quote):"Which leads me to ask, how this question could EVEN really be asked without providing us with definitions to go by?" > All I can say is: not saying everything precisely leaves more space to the debate and it gets even more heated up and interesting.. don't you think? - ultimately almost everything is semantics, which leads me to another question: > Do you think that there actually exist philosophical problems or are they just semantical problems rather than real ones (by "real" I mean: authentical and autonomical)? > (this question was one debated upon by real philosophers by the way: Wittgenstein and Popper who almost jumped to each others' throats because they couldn't stand each other and each others' arguments... it's a funny story.. and authentic) > > pozdrawiam, (greetings) > Ewa -- Humor in the Court: Q. Doctor, did you say he was shot in the woods? A. No, I said he was shot in the lumbar region. To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp