Arguing semantics

[Phoenix Wright]

No way! Even Wikipedia defines it as the study of problems. Such as the trolley problem.

I'd say it's the most important subject. What isn't more important than figuring out the right thing to do in important situations?

that's poor wording on my part, because this is exactly what i mean (i would've linked the trolley problem myself had i remembered the name of it).

there are no correct answers in ethics, so these are meant to spark discussion about what any one person thinks is right, not what is right. there are many ways to attack that problem, and pretty much any other posed ethics problem, thus i feel that philosophy is the discussing of problems, not the solving of problems.

to study a problem is not the same as solving it. i can study shrodinger's thought experiment all i like, but my studies won't lead me to a correct solution, because one does not exist. that's pretty much why these things exist as mere thought experiments, they are unfalsifiable. the many-worlds problem, M-theory, super-string theory, all tend to be unfalsifiable and in the theoretical realm, as are many of the issues philosophers discuss.

so, with that in mind we can conclude that philosophy doesn't help us figure out what to do, but what we can do in any given situation.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Phoenix Wright

[Rehab]

Translated literally from its latin origins, it means "a love of wisdom."

[Steampunk]

To every thing there is a season, as they say. There's a time and place for semantic debate. Most internet discussions aren't it though, which is funny because that is where most semantic nit-picking takes place.

When I studied rhetoric and "disciplined writing" (that's what my school called it and I can't think of another name) in university, we covered something called "working definitions." That's where you set a word's definition for the purposes of what you're discussing. I emphasize the last part because most internet fanatic semantics (or Fanantics, if you will) on the internet completely fail to grasp that. People set working definitions specifically so they don't spend hours debating what a word means.

Fanantics send nails down the blackboard of my soul because they usually don't have any real counter-arguments at the point where they start nitpicking definitions, but they are determined to disagree with you in any way possible. If an argument devolves in to semantics, it's usually a sign that the actual debate is over and the weaker position doesn't know how to concede with grace.

[Espinosa]

Actually, the internet is the only place to hold your Special Olympics word magic games because IRL nobody gives a fuck (and for a good reason).

[Narga_Rocks]

Actually, the internet is the only place to hold your Special Olympics word magic games because IRL nobody gives a fuck (and for a good reason).

And here I thought contract law was all about semantics