Dieter's Dinkskrum

Thought for the day.  Love and Hope I saw someone I admire, musing on social media a little while ago. He was reflecting on the beautiful flowers in bloom, part of the current northern hemisphere spring. The idea which captured my attention was from the poets he quoted. In the comments he remarked that he had been struck by the changing of his perspective this particular spring, seeing the transient beauty of the flowers. The existential wait of death seemed to press the moment's intensity on his mind. So death and love, as a theme filled my mind again as I flipped through the pages of Love: Toward a New Understanding by Simon May, “...the eventuality of our own death is that horizon of certain finality that turns us back decisively toward life; because to look unflinchingly at death’s certainty is to open up paths to our own most grounded and genuine relation to life... the degree to which we achieve such anticipation we are strengthened in our capacity to love; and, to the degree

On my mind... a poem today (bit Dark) The Moderns by Dieter Lubbe Goodbye all charlatans of orthodoxy I defy you're hoping as dust and ash  Happy Sisyphus rolled the rock,  Shameless and unabashed “Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday...” Absurdism in a flash I face the darkness resolute Plagues, stuff and cash  That other madman on the shore  Winked at me to say Nothingness after death taboo Have a beer and slash Happy Sisyphus rolled the tanks Shameless and unabashed Left right left right left  Evidence based and all that I face the darkness resolute, Plagues, your stuff and mash The lobster raised a fuss at this  Transcendence we must grasp Happy Sisyphus rolled the needles shameless and unabashed Ring ring ring Drooling on the floor I face the darkness resolute, Plagues, implant and all

Merely Natural Rights In a recent discussion with regard to natural law, a comment was made (it seemed to suggest, I think) that such appeals to a natural law are merely reformed (merely part of, any marginal group, for the sake of argument). It is difficult to grasp, given the context -  Thomas Aquinas in view, why the reference to the Reformed position at all. But I did think, at the time, it would be interesting... to some, to read this.  “Fundamental to Rawls’s theory is the principle of equal respect for all members of the social order (or for all members who can engage in the relevant “bargaining”). The question is, what is the basis for this principle of equal respect? Dworkin’s conclusion is that “justice as fairness rests on the assumption of a natural right of all men and women to equality of concern and respect, a right they possess not by virtue of birth or characteristic or merit or excellence but simply as human beings with the capacity to make plans and give justice.” Dw

On my mind this morning.  Visual ambiguity, and arguably, ambiguity in language is often used, I  think, to distract from methodological scepticism. It is uncontroversial to assert (from a particularist  position) that inductive arguments (with a tacit control for simplicity of best explanation) give you knowledge (justified belief) albeit not the certainty of a deductive argument.  'The particularist and skeptic have very different approaches to knowledge. For the skeptic, the burden of proof is on the cognitivist. If it is logically possible that one might be mistaken, then knowledge is not present because knowledge requires certainty. Of the two main tasks of epistemology (obtaining true or justified beliefs and avoiding false or unjustified beliefs), the skeptic elevates the latter and requires that his position be refuted before knowledge can be justified. Moreover, if one asks what it means to have “a right to be sure” that one has knowledge, two different senses of this phra