Take A Penny, Leave A Penny

[Phox]

While doing research on Lucretius, the thought occurred to me that the Epicurean (or specifically Lucretian) rejection of the Platonic/Aristotelian teleological arguments and the atomist's mechanical explanation seems to be fairly close to Hobbes' rejection of the religious dogma in the wake of the Scientific Revolution and his desire for an empirical, mechanical explanation of phenomena. Of course, my own bias towards observable data and scientific rationality might explain why I identify so strongly with these two authors.

Penny for your thoughts?

[Luna]

While doing research on Lucretius, the thought occurred to me that the Epicurean (or specifically Lucretian) rejection of the Platonic/Aristotelian teleological arguments and the atomist's mechanical explanation seems to be fairly close to Hobbes' rejection of the religious dogma in the wake of the Scientific Revolution and his desire for an empirical, mechanical explanation of phenomena. Of course, my own bias towards observable data and scientific rationality might explain why I identify so strongly with these two authors.

Penny for your thoughts?

That whooshing sound?  RIGHT over my head.  I'll go scrounge through the couch cushions for my own penny.   

[Don Coyote]

You like those guys because they are like this other guy who is all like "Dude, the Universe has fucking RULES and it's not run by a magic sky dude"

or

[Phox]

While doing research on Lucretius, the thought occurred to me that the Epicurean (or specifically Lucretian) rejection of the Platonic/Aristotelian teleological arguments and the atomist's mechanical explanation seems to be fairly close to Hobbes' rejection of the religious dogma in the wake of the Scientific Revolution and his desire for an empirical, mechanical explanation of phenomena. Of course, my own bias towards observable data and scientific rationality might explain why I identify so strongly with these two authors.

Penny for your thoughts?

That whooshing sound?  RIGHT over my head.  I'll go scrounge through the couch cushions for my own penny.   

I'll try to elaborate more later, but it was more of a "this thing that may lead to an interesting discussion occurred to me and I'll be damned if I let myself forget it in the name of fleshing it out first". And by all means, bring your own pennies. 

You like those guys because they are like this other guy who is all like "Dude, the Universe has fucking RULES and it's not run by a magic sky dude"

or

That's more or less the gist of it, yes. I've done a lot of work on those two in the past, and it never occurred to me on a conscious level that the reason WHY I like writing about them is that their views are similar enough to each other and to mine that I get all giddy and shit. 

[The Rev]

While doing research on Lucretius, the thought occurred to me that the Epicurean (or specifically Lucretian) rejection of the Platonic/Aristotelian teleological arguments and the atomist's mechanical explanation seems to be fairly close to Hobbes' rejection of the religious dogma in the wake of the Scientific Revolution and his desire for an empirical, mechanical explanation of phenomena. Of course, my own bias towards observable data and scientific rationality might explain why I identify so strongly with these two authors.

Penny for your thoughts?

What the fuck did you say???

Hawk,
going back to the kiddie table

[Don Coyote]

While doing research on Lucretius, the thought occurred to me that the Epicurean (or specifically Lucretian) rejection of the Platonic/Aristotelian teleological arguments and the atomist's mechanical explanation seems to be fairly close to Hobbes' rejection of the religious dogma in the wake of the Scientific Revolution and his desire for an empirical, mechanical explanation of phenomena. Of course, my own bias towards observable data and scientific rationality might explain why I identify so strongly with these two authors.

Penny for your thoughts?

That whooshing sound?  RIGHT over my head.  I'll go scrounge through the couch cushions for my own penny.   

I'll try to elaborate more later, but it was more of a "this thing that may lead to an interesting discussion occurred to me and I'll be damned if I let myself forget it in the name of fleshing it out first". And by all means, bring your own pennies. 

You like those guys because they are like this other guy who is all like "Dude, the Universe has fucking RULES and it's not run by a magic sky dude"

or

That's more or less the gist of it, yes. I've done a lot of work on those two in the past, and it never occurred to me on a conscious level that the reason WHY I like writing about them is that their views are similar enough to each other and to mine that I get all giddy and shit. 

Is it that you like them over Plato/Aristotle or that you dislike P/A views?

Coyote, doesn't read old Greek stuff so he has no clue at all, and only took one philosophy class 5 years ago.

[Luna]

While doing research on Lucretius, the thought occurred to me that the Epicurean (or specifically Lucretian) rejection of the Platonic/Aristotelian teleological arguments and the atomist's mechanical explanation seems to be fairly close to Hobbes' rejection of the religious dogma in the wake of the Scientific Revolution and his desire for an empirical, mechanical explanation of phenomena. Of course, my own bias towards observable data and scientific rationality might explain why I identify so strongly with these two authors.

Penny for your thoughts?

That whooshing sound?  RIGHT over my head.  I'll go scrounge through the couch cushions for my own penny.   

I'll try to elaborate more later, but it was more of a "this thing that may lead to an interesting discussion occurred to me and I'll be damned if I let myself forget it in the name of fleshing it out first". And by all means, bring your own pennies. 

You like those guys because they are like this other guy who is all like "Dude, the Universe has fucking RULES and it's not run by a magic sky dude"

or

That's more or less the gist of it, yes. I've done a lot of work on those two in the past, and it never occurred to me on a conscious level that the reason WHY I like writing about them is that their views are similar enough to each other and to mine that I get all giddy and shit. 

Is cool.  One of the reasons I like this place is that it makes me use brain muscles I don't get to exercise elsewhere.  I'd start doing the research to be able to understand this one, but, I got a date to hit people with swords tonight.

[rong]

I think you might be a logical positivist. Good luck

[Phox]

While doing research on Lucretius, the thought occurred to me that the Epicurean (or specifically Lucretian) rejection of the Platonic/Aristotelian teleological arguments and the atomist's mechanical explanation seems to be fairly close to Hobbes' rejection of the religious dogma in the wake of the Scientific Revolution and his desire for an empirical, mechanical explanation of phenomena. Of course, my own bias towards observable data and scientific rationality might explain why I identify so strongly with these two authors.

Penny for your thoughts?

That whooshing sound?  RIGHT over my head.  I'll go scrounge through the couch cushions for my own penny.   

I'll try to elaborate more later, but it was more of a "this thing that may lead to an interesting discussion occurred to me and I'll be damned if I let myself forget it in the name of fleshing it out first". And by all means, bring your own pennies. 

You like those guys because they are like this other guy who is all like "Dude, the Universe has fucking RULES and it's not run by a magic sky dude"

or

That's more or less the gist of it, yes. I've done a lot of work on those two in the past, and it never occurred to me on a conscious level that the reason WHY I like writing about them is that their views are similar enough to each other and to mine that I get all giddy and shit. 

Is it that you like them over Plato/Aristotle or that you dislike P/A views?

Coyote, doesn't read old Greek stuff so he has no clue at all, and only took one philosophy class 5 years ago.

A little of both. When Lucretius was writing, however, he was addressing the specifics of Neo-Platonism and Stoicism, and basically why they amounted to sky-daddy fatalism. (I really like that term....)

While I don't active dislike reading Plato and Aristotle, I do think that they cling a bit too much to "forms" and "goals".

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

My thoughts:

I'm a little embarrassed to comprehend most of the OP.

What specific teleological arguments do you reject?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

My thoughts:  Philosophy is crap.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

My thoughts:  Philosophy is crap.

What about where science and philosophy overlap?

[East Coast Hustle]

My thoughts:  Philosophy is crap.

Took the words right out of my anus.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

My thoughts:  Philosophy is crap.

What about where science and philosophy overlap?

What, "The Dancing Wu Li Masters"?

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

My thoughts:  Philosophy is crap.

What about where science and philosophy overlap?

What, "The Dancing Wu Li Masters"?

Science is an idea, just saying.