Hello all, sorry this is a day late but I wasn't sure if you wanted me to start posting or not. Anyway, on Tuesday most of the class time was taken up by presentations so we didn't really get to discuss Ayer. Any thoughts?
I personally don't like his philosophy that everything has to be true by definition or empirically verifiable. I can understand why it would be useful to weed out incorrect information, but there are so many facts now that would have been thrown out as false in the beginning simply because at the time there wasn't a way to empirically test them. And the fact that the rules for something to be considered "meaningful" contradict the theory itself, takes away from the validity of it.
Tomorrow we are talking about Albert Camus.
Questions:
What Greek myth did Camus use to explain human absurdity?
A: Sisyphus
Do you agree with Camus that human life is completely meaningless since there are no answers that will explain everything?
F: Camus believed a meaningless life was a better choice than death? True or False (A: True)
ReplyDeleteT: In what ways do you feel that humans try to give meaning to life?