“Those who prefer their principles over their happiness, they refuse to be happy outside the conditions they seem to have attached to their happiness.” — Albert Camus
Modern communication is odd.
We send a blinking signal in hopes of receiving a blinking signal.
“ The whole interest of reason, speculative as well as practical, is
centred in the three following questions:
1. What can I know?
2. What ought I do?
3. What may I hope?
The Critique of Pure Reason - Immanuel Kant
“ Don’t confuse philosophy and religion. One is a fluid methodology while the other is a rigid acceptance.
A thought that sprung to mind during Richard Tieszen’s talk, Monads and Mathematics: Gödel, Leibniz, and Husserl at UC Berkeley’s Logic Tea last week. His aim was to “explore some prospects for a Gödelian monadology that result from this identification, with reference to texts of Gödel, Wang’s reports, and aspects of Leibniz’s original monadology.” After the talk, many mathematicians argued that Gödel’s Monadology was confused and incorrect. They cited their own philosophical views as arguments, stating their positions as “immanent realists” or some other version of Platonism. I was appalled at their lack of philosophical maturity, hence my criticism.