[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="180" caption="Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story of a Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers"]
[/caption]Philosophy has often been characterized as the recourse for thinkers, even as consideration for the value it seeks to add is discarded in favor of a more methodical approach toward understanding each of its myriad contributions. While there persists an affectation ofexistential subjectivism, one of objectivism would perhaps beseem the content as well as aid in better contextualizing the lessons of the work at hand in our lives. Before I close this digression, I would like to add that the role philosophy plays, whilst observing from an ontological vantage point, is much greater and demands a compulsion, if not an interest, to discover and establish annealing affinities between any number of entities that we do contemplate to be in the possession of logical similarities.
Whilst a philosophical expediency is predominantly empirical, the opportunity of science reaffirms that character and proceeds to favor establishmentanarianism as an assimilation of conclusions drawn from empirical observations; that our pronouncements on the macrocosm we occupy would be so primordially limited in scope and faith is abundant proof toward the corroboration of determinism. If not for entropy, the deterministic quality of our surroundings would be fait accompli simply because, in our attempts toward the evaluation of this universe, the premise and the calibration have both been quantitatively estimable; there is absolutely no sustainable argument that our conclusions can not be so.
1 comment: