Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philosophy/Archive 20

726:

name attached to it, diagnosis is by symptomology only, there is no current certain treatment and its pathophysiology is not established. Nevertheless over the last 25 years there has been progress in formulating now well established processes of diagnosis, there is general clinical acceptance that management options are limited and offer little benefit for most patients, and there has begun to be progessive investment in researching the biological bases of the condition. Various media controversies have attached to CFS and the false association of the XMRV retrovirus and ongoing open data issues related to a study called PACE are research controversies that have attached to CFS, however neither has impacted on the established positions on diagnosis, pathology or management. To the extent that CFS has itself been considered controversial, this has been related to a debate about the differing significance of imputed psychiatric versus physiologic characteristics, this debate continues between differing specialisms but it is notable that the practioners of just one specialism continue to talk (without providing evidence) in terms of the condition being controversial and that this specialism (psychiatry/psychology or indeed primarily a single English dominated school of thinking – BPS) has in recent years lost ground in the research focus and funding. Neither of two major reports published by respectively the US NIH and IOM

2271:, had apparently decided to delete both of those pages in his or her preference for a single merged page called "Good and evil". The "merger" was apparently done after a tiny Talk page announcement which no-one seems to have taken seriously, but that editor decided that a no-response to his Talk page proposal could be interpreted by him or her as non-opposition and therefor endorsement to do the merger, which was done last June with no-one noticing it. This merger makes no sense from the standpoint of the study of ethics and philosophy. Philosophy pages should not be merged together because they represent polar opposites of meaning. The two pages should be returned to their original state from last June and the current "Good and evil" page can just be left there as its own limited discussion of this polarity in philosophy. The single topic pages deserve to remain as single topic pages for "Good" and "Evil" separately and without merger. I do not think that the editor that did this had any ill intentions, only that the background of that editor appears to be in economics and mathematics and not in philosophy or ethics. I have notified their page anyway for fair notice practices at Knowledge. Can somewhat restore the single purpose pages to their state last June before they were apparently inappropriately merged. 184:, "All encyclopedic content on Knowledge must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Evidently there are sources that call Leary a philosopher, but whether that amounts to a significant view remains in dispute. One user, Fyddlestix, commented, "there are a few legit sources out there that do describe Leary as a philosopher...The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, for example, describes him as 'a psychologist, scientist, and philosopher who made substantive contributions to interpersonal theory and methodology and also gained notoriety for his endorsement of and research on hallucinogens.' So the IP isn't completely off-base, although I'm skeptical that there are enough sources like this out there to justify using the 'philosopher' label." That seems a reasonable observation. There might be a case for calling Leary a philosopher if more high-quality sources were provided, which has not happened so far. 4422:

interacted with. Secondly, it confuses the definition of "public philosophy" under which it means philosophy that addresses issues of public importance with the view that the public must be interacted with. So, for instance, the project undertaken by Essays in Philosophy special issue on public philosophy (Vol 15, issue 1, 2014) is completely misrepresented. The fact that the issue was organized under the first definition, under which "public philosophy" is philosophy in a public venue, is taken as indicating that the authors are committing themselves to the view that public philosophy should "merely" aim to educate the public. Yet not one of the authors in the issue commit themselves to this position. Indeed, a philosopher can only interact with the public in a public venue.

800:

become controversial ? If we were to accept a test of any difference of view as constituting a “controversy” then the whole of theoretical physics would be one enormous and near perpetual ‘controversy’, yet to for encyclopaedia such a classification would clearly be absurd. Certainly (as I acknowledged above) differences of clinical opinion and research perspectives regarding CFS exist, but the question is whether these constitute a medical controversy. The fact that one medical specialism has a narrative (exemplified by Prins et al 2006) in which CFS is consistently presented as “controversial” does not make for a controversy, likewise for one journal and its editor to favour one research perspective does not constitute a balance of MEDRS

708:

these sources of controversy should not of themselves support classification of a subject as a medical controversy. Of course if a piece of research or a treatment has impacted on clinical practice, then that research or treatment may of itself be a medical controversy - Hyperemesis gravidarum is a non controversial medical condition, but its treament with thalidomide remains profoundly controversial because of the harm caused. It is notable that this is no longer a continuing medical controversy as a treatment because no resonable clinician would any longer prescribe thalidomide it for morning sickness, but it remains a controversy because of the the continuing effect on the lives of those who were harmed.

804:. And news, even scientific news, by the very nature of the overriding character of the news media, inevitably provides a presentation that heavily weights for ‘controversy’ where only common difference of opinion is in play. The semantic and encyclopaedic question is firstly what is it that constitutes “controversy” ? Only once that is addressed then can we answer the question of whether (for Knowledge) CFS is as whole subject a medical controversy, or whether elements attaching to CFS are separately ‘controversies’ or whether these attached issues are merely part of the general progress of medical science. -- 3877:, no, they are separate. Lulu Press publishes thousands of separate people's books, and Hyperreality Books published (no longer publishes) ebooks on Amazon.com, Lulu Press, Smashwords.com, Google Books, iTunes, and maybe others. Now that you've quoted that, one can see why some science article editors may not read to the actual science/math material in the ebooks (despite Pythagoras or his teacher Thales being two of various people called 'the first scientist') but I'm sure you've made these Neopythagoreans more interesting to people at this WikiProject who edit articles on such schools of thought.-- 1697:. Given that Popper originated or popularized the paradox, it seems firmly within the philosophical sphere. But other domains, such as psychology or politics, could also be interested in the topic. It is OK for an article to be of interest to multiple Wikiprojects, so feel free to add a Wikiproject if you think it is compelling. With regard to the article itself, how the paradox is discussed really depends on the sources available. If this is a topic in journalism, and not just something reported on by journalists, then feel free to add to the article summarizing the sources found. -- 2083: 1581:. Can it somehow be reclassified under whatever art portal is more appropriate, so the article gets editors who are more familiar with the movement? I'm not an expert, nor particularly adept at Knowledge, but I definitely know that this article deserves a more thorough treatment. The Lettrists were historically important in the history of 20th century art. Feel free to let me know on the talk page, but be aware that I am a very occasional (and extremely minor) participant at Knowledge. Thank you. 2998:) was a bit shocking. Even more bizarre is it had been that redirect for 10 years with no dispute! I didn't know just how justified that redirect was, so I made it so it was not completely lost until a long-term decision could be made. I'm glad we are pretty much on the same page. Can we cut and paste this discussion to the talk page of the article? I think it should be moved all at once, but I am afraid to do that without your permission. I opened a section at the article talk page here: 4712:

our minds? However, if you were being strict, it is original research, but I challenge you to find an article free of original research or free from referencing original research. You can't write without adding originality, especially in the works of philosophy. I guess what makes me upset is that it would be perfect for wikipedia if these ideas were on some blog... and then I could reference it and it would all fit perfectly. Anyway, wikipedia is nothing if not a democracy.

5333: 5100: 474: 31: 5209: 4998:, which is a useful concept, but also not used by all groups studying blackness and racialization of people of African descent that are part of the diaspora, and have their own perspectives not necessarily tied to the base of Africa in a geographically specific way. I suggest that we worth towards understanding Black Studies as a unique philosophical line of critique and area, and one that is included in the 5195: 1901:. Currently, we are undertaking a study about turnover (editors leaving and joining) in WikiProjects within Knowledge. We are trying to understand the effects of member turnovers in the WikiProject group, in terms of the group performance and member interaction, with a purpose of learning how to build successful online communities in future. More details about our project can be found on this 5024: 249:, described in his article as a "former close associate" of Leary. I think there may be grounds for questioning whether it qualifies as a reliable source. The publisher, Archon, is not known to me. It certainly does not seem to be a mainstream press, and its books cannot have the same level of reliability as something published by a mainstream academic press. 2814: 3944:(actually to a different article's talk page!) I just asked if people knew about some other material relevant to the topic, describing what I may have read or thought. If they cite sources for that, of course, they can't use what I thought unless some reliable source says the same thing. Anyway, I clarified that comment now.-- 1473:(reliable sources) say about them, not whether they have or do not have a particular credential. Sometimes this is not straightforward, though, when someone's status as a philosopher is not generally agreed upon. A person's own claim to identify as a philosopher can be considered, but is not necessarily determinative. 1247:

offline treeware reliable sources. If you wanted to make it easier for fellow editors to check sources themselves, you may consider checking if your books in question have scanned content in Google Books. If not, you may want to prefer books that appear in many libraries, rather than more obscure tomes. Either way,

2768: 2570: 5292: 2757: 4174:

of logic is, at least tangentially connected to critical thinking because critical thinking is, in a nutshell, the habit of relying on logic effectively. So I strongly disagree with removing the category from logic-oriented articles such as these without a better rationale. I've watchlisted this page

3226:

I'm not an expert in philosophy, but I dod know about academic journals. The question is whether it is considered a serious professional-level academic journal, not whether it is technically peer-reviewed; many journals in some fields of the humanities still have the older custom of being selected by

1995:

If we're going to include existential philosophy, there's a few other movements partially or fully within continental philosophy that are of approximately equivalent importance, e.g. Psychoanalysis, Hermeneutics, Structuralism, Feminism, and Critical Theory that should probably be included. We could

1564:

concerns an obscure, but significant, 20th century art movement, and I have trouble understanding why it's under the Philosophy portal. It's an art movement, and belongs to that category. From the talk page (where I've grumpily made comments) it seems like many commentators aren't familiar with the

780:

about the PACE controversy and some of those challenging the studies are researchers. Again if this makes it to the Science news section, it is still controversial. My hope is that IOM, Cochrane, and NIH reports will go some way toward establishing consensus within the medical community. But it seems

725:

Medical controversies tend to resolve as research progresses, while in comparison political, media, and social controversies do not, although these latter types may fade from general interest. CFS is certainly a difficult illness about which to construct an encyclopaedia article, it has more than one

4711:

Although I object to deletion, the article is original research...you know when I made it I thought that Original research was a good thing! It doesn't seem right that an inspired collection of ideas on a notable subject has no place in wikipedia. If we can't collate knowledge then how can we expand

4091:

Ideally for any category someone can find a published list somewhere to use as a source. This is challenging for me, because I am not sure whether "analysis" or "Occam's razor" should be called critical thinking. I am not familiar enough with the subject matter to say, so I would depend on a source.

3037:

be comparable to people looking for an article on the profession. I can't say for sure no, but I really doubt it. I think searches for and links to the search term "logicians" are overwhelmingly going to be for the profession, and searches for the philosophical school can be handled via a hatnote,

2641:

It seems to me as if the relevant question isn't whether this is a useful concept (that's original research), but rather whether it is a recognized and notable term of art in philosophy. I agree that there are some interesting similarities between the different ideas presented, but that's not how we

1246:

Great! I think it would be wonderful for that article to have an audit and verification of the content. I agree that lack of inline citations is a problem, especially in the philosophy sections. Finding RS to verify assertions and cut out any synthesis would be a help. It is perfectly alright to use

1095:

used to have sections that referenced black and women philosophers which have been removed. However the argument to reinstate them is only between myself and one other editor. Accusations of "victim mentality" among other things have been thrown around. If other people could come in to give their

161:

Well-personally, I'm not comfortable with the idea that editors are just supposed to settle discussions like who is and who is not a philosopher. Leary for instance, the article passed what is normally considered using reliable references yet your arguments hinted at policy standards that were never

162:

produced. Also- I don't think that it really is debatable whether or not someone is/was a philosopher, like Huxley where I think you changed his article as well? Either someone is/was or not. But as far as WP is concerned, I thought that the rule is that if reliable sources say it, it is acceptable.

4421:

The article on Public Philosophy has been revised at some point and now contains errors. Firstly, it confuses the definition of "public philosophy" under which it is philosophy that is undertaken in a public venue with the position that the public should be only be educated by philosophers and not

3846:

This is one of a series of books outlining the cosmology, philosophy, politics and religion of the ancient and controversial secret society known as the Illuminati, of which the Greek polymath Pythagoras was the first official Grand Master. The society exists to this day and the author is a senior

3678:

fallacy, rather than reading the material, the best you can do?! Many intellectuals (philosophers, scientists, mathematicians) over millennia didn't have a degree (though Hockney apparently has at least an Masters in Communication) or (famous) publisher, but that didn't stop them from writing some

3613:

First of all, please stop restoring your version until this discussion is over. Your edits have been questioned by more than two editors so you are going against consensus. Furthermore, the burden to prove the academic relevance of your sources is still on you. Tegmark's work has been published by

2267:

During the week-end I started reading a book on ethics and decided to look up some key terms on Knowledge for comparison's sake when I discovered that there is no Knowledge page for "Evil" nor is there one for "Good" as key terms in ethics and philosophy. When I looked closer, I found that another

1206:

I'm willing to do a little work to find citations. However, finding good RS on-line is not fun. I've Google searched for Philosophy material on-line many times since I took Philosophy classes, and it is always a chore. Most of it is long rambling articles written by people who may or may not be

799:

From a philosophy perspective there is indeed a question regarding semantics and what “controversy” means in the context of an encyclopaedia. There is more to the issue than a simple question of RS. When (for an encyclopaedia) does the normal level of academic or professional difference of opinion

775:

on the IOM report, which says "The authors of the report hope that the new name will send a signal to clinicians and patients, and could be the first step towards a widespread change of attitude". That's a medical journal hoping clinicians pay attention to the report's recommendations and the fact

707:

There are multiple points by which controversy can attach to an illness. Poor research, fraudulent research, political speech, media commentary, poor or dangerous treament, fraudulent treatment and fraudulent practitioners, celebrity comment, clebrity patient etc. From an encyclopaedic perspective

4065:

I'm afraid I don't put much stock in the category system because the criteria for inclusion seem somewhat murky to me except when the categories are used for driving worklists. Would the correct action be to add a mention of the role these topics have in the general art of rationality or critical

599:

Years ago I happened to read on a web page that in one of his dialogues Plato states that on an Egyptian pyramid there was an inscription which described the way how man can reach the condition of a god by simply breathing. Could anybody here help me find the citation? Thank you very much for the

5545:

has been undergoing significant expansion by one enthusiastic editor recently. Much of the added material has some English problems, which is easy enough to fix, but it's grown beyond my ability and expertise to really evaluate. A lot of it seems pretty off-topic, but there might be some worth

3943:

summarazing/paraphrasing and stating why ideas are relevant... in addition, academics have publicly, later, used Hockney's term 'philosophical mathematics' the same way as he does, with MUHs either based on his or using some same ideas, cited now on the talk page.) On your first link just above

3244:

1. Neither Columbia , Princeton, Yale, Harvard, UCLA, nor Berkeley have a cataloged copy of the journal (even though it is available free on the internet, they have apparently not decided to catalog it). Many other excellent universities do (Chicago, Duke, Indiana, Ohio State for example), but

1801: 1678:

Coming here as I am not sure about the talk page of the article. The last edit was in 2010. The topic of the article is frequently used by journalists to defend against intolerance. It is also a subject of many research papers. I have also found many books that use the topic while discussing

716:

In science controversy isn’t about mere difference of perspective – different groups of researchers are in energetic argument with other groups all the time, for there to be medical/scientific controversy there needs to be more than the usual fighting of corners, instead there needs to be an

138:

article, yes - what of it? Disagreements are common on Knowledge, and so far as I know, I have a right to disagree with people. Instead of making some kind of ill-defined complaint about me, you could instead have left a neutral note that there was a dispute at that article and asked editors

2564:

This is not much evidence, but I have never heard the term used. In addition, I spent a little while searching and found relatively little evidence that it's a widely used term. For instance, here is Eric Schliesser using the term in a way that does not seem to match the use in the article:

401:

So what does this say for Leary? It gives us a helpful set of questions to ask: (1) Is his doctoral degree in philosophy? (2) Does he have any publications in philosophy? (3) Are any of his views (like the aforementioned Eight-circuit model) been noted or otherwise discussed by professional

372:, whose formal training and occupation centers on linguistics, and yet many sources (some highly credible), consider him a philosopher, despite having no academic qualifications to that effect. One thing that might sway people is that Chomsky is actually published in philosophy journals like 1487:

In some cases, the claim to be a philosopher is one strong signal that the person is not. It's also the case that there are academics, with doctorates in philosophy, who, in terms of their contribution to the field, could hardly be considered philosophers. In fact the question 'What is a

687:

A medical controversy should be capable of location within one or more aspects of an illness, disease etc. Classing an entire illness as controversial is rarely encyclopaedic, controversy were it truly exists can be identified in aspects such as diagnosis, physiology, treatment, research

1012:. I'm mystified as to why this particular aspect has to have its own series, not to mention everything else has to defined in terms of certainty. Some of the related concepts have nothing in common. Solipsism and fatalism? Is this worth cleaning up, or should it just be deleted? 737:

Comments on the general issues of medical controversies and on the specific case of CFS would be welcome. Particularly on the appropriateness of removing the CFS article from the medical controversies category, and/or the creation of a medical controversies(Historical) category.

4843: 1346:

their opinions by removing good examples from philosophy and logic articles simply because they don't like the POV the example expresses. That is what is happening here. If this keeps up we won't be able to use common sayings like this in articles. Please take a look. Thanks

2571:

https://books.google.com/books?id=H1H1CAAAQBAJ&pg=PA283&lpg=PA283&dq=mathematicism&source=bl&ots=-BzCZPGbW5&sig=QVeGY5AniYmr0uJUjiAd_FEQWNs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjE46mOmZvSAhWB5SYKHVZKD-A4ChDoAQhDMAU#v=onepage&q=mathematicism&f=false

5293:

https://books.google.com/books?id=hJhaBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA650&lpg=PA650&dq=preferentism&source=bl&ots=otF2X_RQT7&sig=sLMoNLI6AVcnAlzTa9_X0K1iG3k&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjkztup7pDXAhXGDZAKHeU-BvQ4ChDoAQg0MAM#v=onepage&q=preferentism&f=false

3841: 880:? You may notice that I think there is more to it than what can be said from the philosophical side. You are free to improve (or critizise) those parts as well if you feel inclined. Thanks for many interesting contributions in advance. -- Kku 10:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC) 316:, by the same user who reverted Blue Mist 1. The article is thus suffering from very unseemly behavior aimed at presenting Leary as a "philosopher" without qualification. Conceivably, some qualifier other than "self-described" might stand a better chance of acceptance. 2526:

is a major movement in philosophy of science, yet as far as I can tell every sentence in the article on it is false, and the one citation is both unreliable and does not support the statement it is supposed to support. Anyone have the requisite background to do some

1908:

If you are interested in our study and willing to share your experience with us, please reach me at bowen@cs.umn.edu. The interview will be about 30 - 45 minutes via phone, Skype or Google Hangout. You will receive a $ 10 gift card as compensation afterwards.

3448:

Swpb is apparently not even a WikiProject Philosophy member, but hoping to get people to push his anti-philosophical view. What I wrote is not original research, but cited, and is not fringe, but groundbreaking academic material. The fact that Hockney wrote

118:

article especially, interactions with other editors have been curt and sharp as-if other editors are supposed to be following guidelines specific to philosophy that as far as I can tell do not exist. Any Guidance concerning this would be helpful-thanks.

1532:

In case anyone is interested: I have set up an editing drive about women in philosophy. Several members of the Women in Red project have expressed interest in joining in, and, of course, all members of WikiProject Philosophy would be more than welcome.

2615:'s reference is helpful. My google search of "mathematics and reality" produced quite a lot . of material on this subject. The only question for me is whether the term "mathematicism" is the best term of this kind of thinking. Or if it belongs in the 1679:

intolerance. However, I don't see too many notable philosophical discussions or debates around the topic. So my question is where does the topic belong to? Philosphy / Journalism / Literature? I am not sure how such topics are handled so please help --

1203:. I was disappointed to see that Plato was rated a class C article there, although I think it might currently be Class-B. The reason: lack of in-line citations. I agree; that's a problem. Same with other Philosophy articles I have encountered. 218:

article to support his POV, before he was finally TBANned. Among the common contributing factors in these articles are citations to what appear to be RS but which are written by members of a closed group of acolytes of the purported philosopher.

2159:(almost always rendered in English as "Third Reich", not "Third Realm"). There seemed to be a general understanding that the situation was suboptimal, but there was more than one possible fix, and it seems we never got around to picking one. 402:

philosophers or in philosophy journals? (4) Has he ever been employed by a philosophy department? (5) Are there any credible sources that depict him as a philosopher? These questions seem to be a good starting point in answering the question.

3789:

A source's material or accuracy, not perceived authority, makes it reliable. As for red herring, not really, as this isn't a formal debate. Formal reasoning fallacies apply in any case, but ones that apply to formal debates only apply to

5517:

have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

2548:

I'd like to draw attention to this new article. I'm not sure what to do with it, because (1) the topic is valid -- Britannica has an article with this title; (2) the content seems not bad; (3) the sourcing is completely unacceptable.

139:

interested in philosophy topics to comment on it, whatever their views (the dispute concerns whether Leary should be labelled a philosopher). As for "interactions with other editors have been curt and sharp", I have been considerably

4232:, but this certainly isn't a topic I'm familiar with. If the article looks fixable, some cleanup would be much appreciated. If not, perhaps we could propose it for deletion. Any thoughts are much appreciated. Thanks! Happy editing! 4549:

article, which concerns whether or how criticism of the book should be reflected in the lead. I would welcome comments from other editors, whatever their view of the issue, because discussion on the talk page is currently stalled.

1214:

for Plato and for other Philosophers and Philosophy subject matters? I could go to my bookshelf, but then it makes it harder for others to verify, if my book is not available on-line. Same problem with going to the library.

2573:, but I'm not sure that establishes notability, or justifies the range of topics included in the page. P.S. I wasn't sure whether to post here in response to you, or on the talk page. I will gladly move my comment if need be. 4146:

article? I'm not all that impressed with that article, and I am curious if you have a similar take. Looking at the article will help address the questions regarding the categories that should apply to critical thinking.

2312:

Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at

1140:

over whether the following categories should be applied to the article: Category:Gay writers, Category:LGBT historians, and Category:LGBT writers from France. I invite interested editors to comment whatever their views.

643:

There does not seem to be any guidance on what in WP terms constitutes a medical controversy and there is a danger that the Category: Medical Controveries could act as a self referential axiom, whereby a page listed at

2114: 2610:

by NOVA on Cable, which describes math as the "language of the universe", and one subjects says is the universe "only has mathematical properties." I suggest we build on the article rather that dispense with it.

2591:

I agree the sourcing--so far--is weak, but the concept that everything is mathematical I have certainly encountered and I think it is probably fair to say that Pythagoras and/or his cult would sign on to such an

1620:

Based on the definitions in their leads, they all sound somewhat different, but it's hard to tell if that's because each article is a little too narrowly focused or if they're actually separate topics. Thoughts?

3009:. But if either of you want to post there, please feel free. My only real concern is how justified the original redirect was and whether it truly needs to be preserved, that might be worth asking at that page. 1526: 4746:? The first sentence, in bold is "Knowledge articles must not contain original research. " Content in Knowledge should be cited based upon reliable sources and should not be OR. I agree with the Prod tag.– 929:. The way I get it, (1) is for the main fields of philosophy, (2) for the crossover/fusion between philosophy and another discipline. I have no experience with philosophy and for me it seems "off", that 2705:"Everything in the Universe Is Made of Math – Including You". I admit that Discovery is certainly not a great source for topics of philosophy, as a mainstream for lay-persons "scientific" magazine. -- 5483: 5253: 717:

exceptional divide in scientific perspective. In medicine such an exceptional divide should be indentifiable in MEDRS, with the material clearly specifying the basis and location of the controversy.

4118:, sources on e.g. the topic Analysis should consistently indicate that this topic Analysis belongs to Critical thinking. So this is not about sources on Critical thinking but the other way around. 4011:

That's a different article, and I didn't say that, though they are using the term the same way and Hockney should be credited as the originator of the contemporary term and one relevant theory.--

2325: 2222: 1327:

There is an edit conflict over whether the sentence "Society must have laws, otherwise there would be chaos" is a reductio ad absurdum argument. Outside opinions are needed. Please stop by at

3273:

2. It is composed of a sequence of special issues on different topics and schools of thought. Typically such special issues are selected by the issue editor, who has the primary responsibility.

986:, because every discipline is also a (branch of) science. Also there are topics who are no discipline, like time, happiness, life etc. This is only an information, I have no further questions. 134:

Respectfully, it is not clear to me what you are trying to accomplish with these vague complaints. What exactly do you expect editors to do? I had a disagreement with some other editors at the

4873: 4789: 4839: 206:

This question comes up repeatedly at articles edited by enthusiasts, some well-informed and well-intentioned, and others with limited perspective on the issue. It's a longstanding issue at

3377:

on the talk-page concerning whether the current first sentence (including its footnote) is correct, encyclopedic, and appropriately supported by citation. More voices would be welcome. --

2893:. I hope everyone agrees this was a needed change. I do not know much about the formatting and requirements of disambugation pages, so if I did something wrong, please let me know... -- 3575:

They're secondary sources on Tegmark and on MUHs. As David Tornheim pointed out, actually the MUH article doesn't even start with secondary sources. You're just worsening that problem--

667:

Not a mere difference of medical opinion, either between individual clinicians/researchers, informal groups of clinicians/researchers, formal research groups, institions or specialisms.

5437:(I can't. Otherwise I would spent the rest of my life in libraries to harvest all the refs to feed them. And which btw. no one needs who actually has read the book in the first place.) 3509:

rather than spend some time studying philosophy and not waste our time with crack pot theories that have already been considered long ago without such naivete and superficiality. --

876:

put forward his view of the world, after all, and I am convinced that so far we have a blind spot here that should be addressed by WP. May I kindly ask the community to contribute to

1511:, partly in memory of Kevin Gorman, and partly to continue his good work. If you think you might be interested in being involved, please do go and comment on the thread in question. 4270: 3158:

It's an attempt to solicit comments on the issue we discussed in your AFD proposal, for the purpose of resolving that discussion. I'm not sure how it could be any more transparent.

1207:

experts. If they are it is often way to technical for the lay reader, or just the opposite: way too superficial. My initial search turns up self-published works at Universities.

2120:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

693:

A medical controversy may also be geographically specific. This can be difficult to address encyclopaedically and it is essential that the geographical nature be clearly specified.

4990:

isn't a very useful concept when we are talking about ideas and movements related to Black Studies which stretch outside of the geographical space of North America. For instance,

2827: 2280: 1269:. Google has scanned a huge number of both copyrighted and PD books, including recent texts in many fields, and they can be searched. A random sample of works on Aristotle: 5217: 5354: 5121: 1070: 495: 5161:

Should the categories Ashkenazi Jews, German people of Jewish descent, Jewish atheists, Jewish philosophers, Jewish socialists, Jewish sociologists be added to this article?

2994:

I pretty much agree with both of you here and especially like the idea of an article dedicated to logician(s). I'm sure you both agree that the way it was when I found it (

698:

A medical controversy may be service or specialism specific, again to be encyclopaedic the clinical/academic location of the controversy needs to be accurately identified.

975: 937:, who are fusions between social/political science and philosophy are not in (2) but in (1). Is is because of history/tradition? Would suggest me to start a discussion at 926: 380:, which ought to count as philosophical contributions at the highest level of professional philosophy (even if you don't have a doctoral degree from a philosophy program). 5361:

in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!

5128:

in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!

502:

in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!

5387: 3499:

interesting, even if they usually have serious problems. It's amusing how scientists (who think their knowledge of the scientific method some how makes them experts on

97: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 3739:

Our personal views are irrelevant. This is an encyclopedia; we are supposed to provide detailed citations to reliable sources. The whole sophistry-talk is an obvious

3235:

was peer-reviewed in the usual sense; Albert Einstein refused to publish in any journal that was going to review his manuscripts.) What is relevant is the following:

4428:

Is this still an issue? I don't know who wrote this or when and why it isn't discussed on the entry's talk page. I have made some edits. More citations are needed.

3909:: "material unsuitable for talk pages may be subject to removal per the talk page guidelines". Those threads are not about improving Knowledge but an invitation to 1163: 5038: 263:

You raise an excellent point--there are 50 shades of philosopher. Would a more nuanced description in the article help achieve consensus? Perhaps one could say:

2245: 5513:

pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of

3119:

Regardless of one's point of view, this is indisputably the proper place to request comment for this topic. I don't think I'm falling afoul of any of the four

5375: 5142: 3939:

That's not true; you're misreading/misrepresenting what I said. Swpb (who edits the article) said ‘WP:BRD: bring concerns to talk, w/sources,’ so I did that (

5257: 4665:

Thanks Carole- Original research is the best type of research... I know Knowledge is meant to be an encyclopedia but I think we should be sharing ideas too.

2867: 4170:. I know for a fact that there are academic works on critical thinking, so I'm a little surprised at the relative sparsity of sources. All that being said, 516: 5349: 5116: 4793: 3276:

3 There is no reason to think this is primarily or in significant part a student journal, with editing and articles by undergraduate ofr graduate students.

650:

is automatically defined as medical controversy without necessarily meeting, or continuing to meet an encyclopaedic definition of a Medical controversies.

490: 2775:

from here on be the view that everything that exists can be studied mathematically either directly or indirectly." (the footnote referring to a work by

2439:. Can you post your specific concerns about that portion of the article on the article's talk page and give notice here when your concerns are noted? -- 559:

The two terms are not coextensive philosophically, you are correct. Do you just need help untangling the redirect or is there something else going on?

540:. Unless I misunderstand, though, the two terms mean something rather different in logic, don't they? Help with the redirect is appreciated. (See also 5249: 3016: 3006: 2917: 1590: 1776:

reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact or when used in certain kinds of moral and

4605: 5048:

in a way that provides an easy "rule" for capitalization that is a compromise between the conflicting philosophy and linguistics approaches to the

3270:

1. It is indexed in the major index in the field, Philosopher's Index, and would therefore probably qualify as notable by the standards used at WP.

1508: 1170: 731: 1565:

movement at all. I think it would receive more knowledgable treatment under a portal concerning art movements. It has a strong relationship to

577:

Two specific questions, I guess: (1) What should the redirect point to? (2) Should anything be added to or removed from the disambiguation page?

368:

I agree with the general view that we need clear standards on who is considered a philosopher. A litmus tests on this issue is (or ought to be)

776:

that there is a position piece in a an important medical journal shows this is still a big controversy within the medical community. Here is a

3095: 872:), I have been struggling to put something together that somehow provides a bigger view of the topic. The sciences have come a long way since 5310: 4979: 2065: 47: 17: 4364:

for background. It is specifically about whether or not academic journals articles should list the editorial board's members / how to avoid

2908:

Looks like a good start, but I'm not sure it's finished. Normally, we like to see the redirect for plurals point to the singular, but since

5514: 4850: 4352:

The dispute at AN is about an admin's behaviour. But anyone wanting to comment on the content dispute is welcomed to bring the topic up at

2749:"The view or belief that everything can be described ultimately in mathematical terms, or that the universe is fundamentally mathematical." 431: 273: 2687:--there is--but where the material and proponents of that conceptualization (or similar concepts) should be filed in the encyclopedia. -- 544:, which points to Defeasible reasoning and (since my recent edit) Defeasible logic. If necessary, help there would also be appreciated.) 5555: 5459: 4336:

There's a dispute about a philosoophy journal at WP:AN, and what kinds of sources are permitted, in case anyone here is interested. See

2832: 1872: 1035: 971: 844: 5448: 2737:"Mathematicism, the effort to employ the formal structure and rigorous method of mathematics as a model for the conduct of philosophy." 5440: 5231: 4586: 1968: 899: 5076: 4291: 3689:,) which aren't in that article, but as such, they are of interest in contemporary Neopythagoreanism & Neoplatonism (and modern 1985: 1810: 1604: 1159: 114:

has been up-to in topics concerning Philosophy, in particular Philosophers, it would be a big help. Beginning-with a problem in the

1488:

philosopher?' is, itself, a philosophical question, not one that can be answered with a simple set of easily established criteria.

777: 4050:

from a range of articles that are virtually a catalog of tools often considered essential parts of the critical thinking toolkit,

662:

Not a media controversy. i.e a controversy that is presented in the media as a medical issue but is not reflected as such in MEDRS

430:

Since this is a listed project, there is an ongoing RfC to determine the validity of flags in Genocide-related articles. It's at

4485: 3392: 3345: 2616: 2597: 2314: 835: 1996:

alternatively just leave out existential philosophy as it would be under the heading of continental philosophy like the above.--

1836:

so it has been in the article a long time and I'm hoping that someone familiar with the topic will check what should occur. The

5056:

years of editorial dispute, not perpetuate it by forcefully advancing one's (or one's profession's) preferred ideal. I.e., no

4466: 4297:

Anyone on this project care to check this one out? It all seems very odd, but perhaps a Kierkegaard expert will understand it.

4229: 918: 3981:'philosophical mathematics' from Hockney? You keep inserting original research to Knowledge articles which is unacceptable. -- 3311:

Knowledge talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Should the WP:ANDOR guideline be softened to begin with "Avoid unless" wording or similar?

4955: 4743: 4555: 4378: 4020: 3953: 3886: 3799: 3702: 3584: 3466: 3310: 2332:

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

1736: 1731: 1181: 983: 646: 321: 254: 189: 148: 3255:

3 The authors are typically philosophy faculty ay smaller universities, not senior faculty from the most famous departments,

242: 4641:, which seems to be mostly original research. Is this a topic that deserves its own article, or should it be redirected to 3258:

4 The articles are written in a very slightly less formal and technical style than the usual academic philosophy journal.

2218: 1740: 1066: 930: 809: 743: 5522: 2104: 772: 5479: 5428: 3505: 3005:

Also, I think that if we are all in agreement we can make some of the changes you guys proposed without having to go to

2675:

I never suggested that the concept was "useful" (or not useful). I simply showed that the ideas are "out there" in the

2401:

Especially the section on Aristotle could use some help from somebody who knows more about what they are talking about.

1797: 1305: 979: 308:, on the basis of one user's personal understanding of the meaning of "philosopher." Skyerise restored "self-described" 5435:(which to my mind in this circumstances is quite impertinent), it seems that is a task for seasoned Wikipedians to do. 3386: 4999: 4983: 4531: 4477: 3414:). This editor is clearly conducting original research here on Knowledge and most of his edits should be reverted per 3337: 2821: 2807: 2302: 1723: 922: 827: 541: 4578: 4566: 768: 4166:

seems to be desperately in need of sources, some of which I can scare up. Many of those sources can also be used at

5358: 5125: 5039:

Knowledge talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#RfC 2: Specific proposal to revise the third bullet of MOS:JOBTITLES

4047: 2604: 2508: 2358: 2276: 2230: 1939: 1586: 1570: 934: 831: 499: 38: 4978:

Hello, I'm writing a draft article about Afro-pessimism, a philosophical approach in the Black Radical tradition:

1507:

Hello everyone; I've proposed a possible drive/subproject for creating articles about women in philosophy over at

4454:

article, and since I don't think that I have the level of commitment to finish it, I invite people to rewrite it

2431:, although I did take a class on Ancient Philosophy for which half was about him. I quickly perused the section 2055: 2045: 1958:. Should we have a redirect at Crime and Punishment? Please comment there if you have an opinion on this issue.-- 1493: 1328: 5427:

Seems the authors made heavy use of their misconceptions and conjectures. A lot of issues already listed on the

4582: 4570: 281:

As a counterculture figure, Leary was outside the mainstream of philosophy (my guess, I have no source for this)

5617: 5510: 5401: 5314: 4987: 4824: 4778: 4621: 4551: 4501: 4207: 4152: 3514: 3382: 3357: 3326: 3024: 2898: 2796: 2710: 2692: 2624: 2444: 2342: 1220: 1177: 805: 739: 732:

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/19012/beyond-myalgic-encephalomyelitischronic-fatigue-syndrome-redefining-an-illness

634:

This is posted here as the Category:Medical controversies page falls under the Wikiproject Philosophy purview.

317: 250: 185: 144: 111: 5621: 5590: 5559: 5531: 5499: 5467: 5405: 5318: 5277: 5175: 5085: 5011: 4968: 4755: 4721: 4695: 4674: 4657: 4625: 4594: 4559: 4535: 4505: 4471: 4437: 4410: 4391: 4346: 4326: 4306: 4282: 4260: 4241: 4211: 4190: 4156: 4127: 4105: 4074: 4024: 3990: 3957: 3926: 3890: 3867: 3803: 3752: 3706: 3645: 3588: 3554: 3518: 3470: 3439: 3404: 3361: 3330: 3290: 3209: 3188: 3174: 3153: 3139: 3114: 3076: 3055: 3028: 2985: 2928: 2902: 2871: 2844: 2800: 2714: 2696: 2651: 2628: 2582: 2558: 2536: 2512: 2470: 2448: 2414: 2389: 2346: 2257: 2234: 2206: 2187: 2136: 2126:

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

2071: 2034: 2005: 1921: 1880: 1853: 1706: 1688: 1662: 1639: 1542: 1520: 1497: 1481: 1457: 1438: 1419: 1386: 1353: 1337: 1312: 1291: 1260: 1239: 1224: 1185: 1149: 1126: 1105: 1082: 1047: 1021: 995: 965: 950: 907: 848: 813: 790: 762: 747: 624: 586: 568: 553: 458: 443: 411: 354: 325: 295: 258: 232: 193: 171: 152: 128: 5463: 1557:

Sorry, only a very casual editor at Knowledge, so apologies if this is not the right way to go about things.

653:

Suggested principles of what would be required to meet an encyclopaedic definition of a medical controversy.

5551: 5444: 5419: 5412: 4911: 4590: 4353: 3675: 2262: 2030: 1876: 1650: 1469:

You're asking this question the wrong way. What WP says about a person being a philosopher is based on what

991: 946: 439: 4638: 4631: 2263:

Undiscussed 'merger' of two Knowledge pages into one without consensus; Proposal for separation of articles

180:, TeeVeeed. Several editors noted that the case for labeling Leary a philosopher was open to question. Per 5455: 4751: 4653: 4527: 4455: 4225: 4184: 4123: 4100: 3986: 3922: 3863: 3748: 3641: 3550: 3435: 3039: 2532: 2483:

Hi there, About a week ago i decided to create a navbox for philosophy of science, you can see it in my

2082: 2001: 1964: 1833: 1825: 1766: 1614: 1609: 1453: 1374: 1248: 1101: 903: 3636:

is self-published (official publisher is "Hyperreality Books"; no further details about it are known). --

5542: 5073: 5061: 4925: 4302: 4163: 3398:

Edit war here about a writer who may be a crackpot; someone with subject expertise please take a look? —

3374: 2740: 2647: 2578: 2385: 2272: 2226: 2202: 2194: 2174:

but it's not completely implausible that it might not always redirect there). I'm not sure this is the

1947: 1932: 1829: 1702: 1684: 1582: 1397: 1256: 1235: 1122: 895: 877: 865: 839: 786: 758: 291: 4853:

should be at the top of page, with links to create the relevant redirects and verify the abbreviations.

1902: 5572: 5565: 5521:

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at

3487:. I haven't looked carefully, but from looking at the first two references, they do not appear to be 2856:

Can someone who understands Philosophy please remove the excessive puffery at this article? Thanks. --

2291: 5299:, edited by John Skorupski). Knowledge apparently doesn't have any mention of this topic at all. 4804: 4546: 4433: 4361: 4319: 4062:

article and Marcocapelle is correct that these articles did not mention "critical thinking" by name.

3184: 3149: 3120: 3110: 2496: 2466: 2410: 2062: 1669: 1630: 1489: 1320: 1137: 5613: 5495: 5397: 5215:

Contest details: create biographical articles for women of any country or occupation in the world:

5007: 4872:

There are links in the maintenance templates to facilitate this. See full detailed instructions at

4788:

redirect detection to help with the creation and maintenance of these redirects, and will populate

4617: 4609: 4497: 4489: 4464: 4203: 4148: 3510: 3378: 3353: 3322: 3314: 3072:

RFC on an AFD: this philosophy publication doesn't explicitly say that if it's peer reviewed or not

3051: 3020: 2981: 2894: 2840: 2792: 2706: 2688: 2620: 2440: 2338: 2183: 2123:

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

1844:") that appears to be from "Walton, Douglas. Informal Logic", and that was the original reference. 1777: 1765:

This article is sometimes mentioned during talk-page discussions. Following one such discussion, a

1658: 1538: 1516: 1434: 1216: 1043: 1017: 961: 564: 454: 407: 349: 227: 5303: 5284: 4337: 2221:

article. Interested parties are invited to take part at the review page, which can be found here:

5547: 4986:.. but it also lacks categories for Black Studies. In my academic training, it's understood that 4982:. I'm wondering what (if) people use as infoboxes for philosophical concepts? I know we have the 4951: 4921:

Use the link in the maintenance template to create the redirects and automatically tag them with

4691: 4374: 4278: 4256: 4237: 4016: 3949: 3882: 3795: 3698: 3580: 3462: 3249: 2554: 2253: 2026: 1849: 1842:

questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue

1654: 1111: 987: 942: 620: 609: 435: 167: 124: 5332: 5099: 2052:, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, 1694:

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has a good discussion of toleration, including paradoxes

473: 2601: 237:

That is unfortunately true, and I think the situation you are describing may well apply at the

5393: 5273: 5170: 4813: 4747: 4717: 4670: 4649: 4197: 4177: 4167: 4143: 4137: 4119: 4093: 4086: 4059: 4043: 3982: 3918: 3859: 3744: 3637: 3620: 3546: 3431: 2962: 2861: 2528: 2484: 2130: 1997: 1976: 1959: 1917: 1807: 1449: 1367: 1097: 801: 767:

For WP purposes, this doesn't seem a matter of philosophy, but of reliable sources. Here is a

5482:? It's a newly created article moved directly to the mainspace by a student participating in 4066:

thinking and then re-add the category? And thank Marcocapelle for pointing out the omission?

3410:

Said editor (Dchmelik) is promoting Mike Hockney's fringe theories (Hockney is the author of

2976:

should redirect to that article, which should have a hatnote for the philosophical school. --

2746: 5609: 5585: 5487: 5067: 4995: 4963: 4386: 4298: 4115: 3685: 3542: 3427: 3367: 2670: 2643: 2612: 2574: 2432: 2395: 2381: 2198: 2015: 1980: 1698: 1680: 1252: 1231: 1176:

Thanks, but what happened to the citations? Article content will need to be properly cited.

1146: 1118: 1078: 861: 782: 754: 582: 549: 287: 246: 3629: 2596:, or at least one where math is a basic foundational building block of reality. Consider 5057: 4938: 4486:

Knowledge talk:Citation overkill#Should this essay be changed to encourage more citations?

4429: 4365: 4341: 3910: 3906: 3690: 3419: 3302: 3180: 3145: 3106: 2702: 2523: 2458: 2422: 2402: 2163: 2102:

message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the

1943: 1928: 1868: 1837: 1727: 1622: 1309: 1096:

suggestions, that would be very good so that this isn't just a dumb one-on-one argument.--

211: 177: 5546:

keeping, so if anyone wants to take a look, it could probably use some eyes. Thanks. –

4051: 3834: 3503:, which they frequently know little about) try to reinvent the wheel with stuff like in 1071:

Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_May_28#Category:Sociocultural_globalization

5491: 5208: 5162: 5003: 4991: 4959: 4934: 4520: 4459: 4382: 4248: 3625: 3279:

4. The Board of advisors is very distinguished, but that is not necessarily meaningful

3202: 3167: 3132: 3088: 3047: 2999: 2977: 2850: 2836: 2771:: "Ultimately, set-theoretical ontology is a remainder of Platonic mathematicism. Let 2764: 2753: 2504: 2454: 2376: 2179: 2049: 2022: 1972: 1534: 1512: 1464: 1430: 1410: 1348: 1343: 1332: 1286: 1200: 1062: 1039: 1013: 957: 560: 537: 450: 403: 342: 220: 181: 5523:

http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Philosophy

3541:). @Dchmelik: Could you please provide independent secondary sources? The burden (see 3101:

Please note - to avoid any impression of forum shopping or canvassing, please comment

2825:

has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the

1429:

Should someone with an undergraduate degree in philosophy be listed as a philosopher?

677:

Not a fact established by unsupported opinion even when expressed by authors of MEDRS.

5368: 5135: 5045: 4947: 4910:

If you cannot determine the correct abbreviation, or aren't sure, leave a message at

4809: 4687: 4451: 4370: 4357: 4274: 4266: 4252: 4233: 4012: 3945: 3878: 3791: 3694: 3576: 3545:) to prove the notability and academic relevance of Mike Hockney's work is on you. -- 3492: 3484: 3458: 3415: 3286: 2783:

Sorry if I repeated any of your research. It seems the term can be justified in the

2550: 2542: 2249: 1845: 1445: 1382: 1167: 1058: 938: 616: 533: 509: 238: 163: 135: 120: 115: 4228:

while looking through articles tagged as needing sections. The article feels like a

1942:, I have sought opinions regarding possible alternate translations for the title of 1009: 672:

Not an historical division of opinion between individual clinicians/researchers etc.

638: 5431:, proposals how to improve it too. But since all this is obstinately challenged as 5269: 5166: 4796:

help readers find journal articles based on their official ISO abbreviations (e.g.

4739: 4713: 4666: 4401: 3914: 3837: 3683:(also Leibnizian) Illuminati (philosophers of Platonic enlightement, as in Plato's 3615: 3500: 3423: 2857: 2788: 2784: 2776: 2680: 2676: 2436: 2171: 2152: 1913: 1470: 1211: 854: 727: 369: 143:

rude and aggressive than certain other editors in the course of that disagreement.

3179:

Are you asking people to comment here, or at the Article for Deletion discussion?

1757: 1600:

Do any of these three articles talk about the same concept and need to be merged?

1342:

I know this seems like a trivial issue, but more and more, aggressive editors are

300:

Blue Mist 1 altered the "philosopher" description to "self-described philosopher"

5291:

I'm seeing some discussion of "preferentism" vs. "non-preferentism", e.g. here (

4400:

on the article concerned - probably best if other editors contribute there. ----

2734: 1282: 1278: 1274: 1270: 1138:

Talk:Michel_Foucault#RfC:Should_Foucalt_be_tagged_with_LGBT_and_Gay_categories.3F

1061:

topic, there is a lot of intersection with categories of related WikiProjects of

5576: 5194: 4082: 4067: 3975: 3740: 3679:

world-changing ideas, that are all over Knowledge. He says he's a member of the

2921: 2727: 2295: 2167: 2148: 1695: 1474: 1142: 1092: 1074: 578: 545: 341:

that would benefit from additional participation by Philosophy Project members.

338: 215: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2941:

to take you to different pages, and the latter is currently too much about the

2193:

It seems like a reasonable solution: I added a reference to the third realm to

860:

Ever since my timid contribution to negated existence was bluntly dismissed by

4885: 4798: 4642: 3874: 3830: 3454: 3079:

Requesting someone with good experience with philosophy journals to weigh in.

2607: 2566: 1864: 1719: 1306:

requested move to change numerous article titles which contain Dr. King's name

873: 639:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Chronic_fatigue_syndrome#Problems_of_controversy

2110:

that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

5601: 5528: 5155: 5052:

concept. Please keep in mind that the discussion is about finding a way to

4516: 4323: 3399: 3194: 3159: 3124: 3080: 3034: 2973: 2958: 2938: 2882: 2500: 2428: 2011: 1824:

The text is perhaps a little ambitious, and a "failed verification" tag was

1569:

and even stronger relationship (in fact, an inspirational precursor) on the

1509:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Kevin Gorman and women in philosophy

1401: 1230:

How would you do that for Einstein or Euler or Shakespeare or Rembrandt? ~~

4162:

Having glanced over the article, it looks okay, but not particularly good.

1886:

Interview invitation from a Knowledge researcher in University of Minnesota

1251:

can help ascertain the relative availability of your sources. Good luck! --

1162:

is a stub. I ran the extensive German article through Google translate and

5527:

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.—

4251:. As always, feel free to object by removing the template. Happy editing! 2025:

features arguments for either variation. Greater participation is invited.

245:

document, "An annotated bibliography of Timothy Leary", written partly by

5343: 4318:

Massive edits by IP turned the article, especially the lead, to be about

4058:

being two recent examples. I've complained before about the state of the

4055: 3496: 3281: 3245:

clearly it is not regarded as essential to a graduate philosophy program.

3042:. (Note by the way that 1820 views is not really a lot — for comparison 2969: 2954: 2934: 2909: 2684: 2593: 1561: 1549: 1378: 207: 3833:, an online print-on-demand, self-publishing and distribution platform, 2916:, that approach might be problematical here. Perhaps raise the issue at 2813: 2453:

Gave it my best go. Surprised the article has no reference to e. g. the

1069:(a major aspect of and 2nd tier level of the Globalization category) at 5490:

once before, but maybe this time around it is OK for the mainspace. --

4312: 3457:

fallacy, rather than reading the material, the best you can both do?!--

3453:

novel has nothing to do with his non-fiction. Is rude sophistry of the

3033:

Well, the question is, would the searches/links specifically by way of

1566: 5571:

Any philosophical insight that would be useful for the improvement of

4686:

I have "prodded" the article; it clearly doesn't belong in Knowledge.

3046:

had 76K, though of course that doesn't mean that "logician" would.) --

2965:. Then put a hatnote at the top for the Chinese philosophical school. 612: 5605: 2730:. It appears the terms has different meanings to different experts: 2370: 1574: 1283:

Leunissen, Explanation and Teleology in Aristotle's Science of Nature

753:

CFS should be removed from the medical controversies category...IMO--

5347:, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of 5114:, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of 4606:

Knowledge talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#RfC: Red links in infoboxes

2933:

I don't like this solution as it stands. It's counterintuitive for

2488: 1448:

would be a philosopher and an economist, which he obviously isn't.--

1088:

Mention of Black and Women Philosophers in the "Philosopher" article

1038:. Feel free to drop some suggestions on how to improve the article. 488:, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of 106:

Help please. Standard whether WP should use the label "philosopher"

5418:

Could one of you experts please, please have a look at the article

5306:? (Or a section about it in an existing article if appropriate?) 4397: 2743:"the belief that everything can be explained in mathematical terms" 2294:

for a discussion about a simplified summary proposed for the lead.

2178:

possible solution, but at least it's better than the way it was. --

4831: 4785: 4175:

and the pages I've linked to. I'll start poking at them as I can.

3043: 2913: 2364: 2081: 1196: 5324:

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

5091:

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

3693:, such as Leibnizianism, that continued Classical Greek ideas.)-- 2320:

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

1527:

Knowledge:WikiProject Women in Red/2016 Women in Philosophy Drive

1065:. Currently, comments would be welcome on a proposed re-name of 465:

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

5110: 3071: 2569:. It does appear to have been used in discussions of Descartes: 1578: 1057:

Due to the inherent inter- and multi-disciplinary nature of the

1032: 484: 5229:

Read more about how Women in Red is overcoming the gender gap:

2078:

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

1375:

Template talk:Theology § Too large - discussion resumed in 2016

5484:

Knowledge:Wiki_Ed/UCSD/HIGR_210_Socialism_in_China_(2017_Fall)

5027: 3012:

Wow. The School of Names had 1,820 views in the last 30 days

2147:

Quite some time ago there was a discussion about the redirect

1898: 1329:

Talk:Reductio ad absurdum#Removal of example from introduction

25: 5323: 5090: 3852:

Dchmelik's edits (insertion of citations to Hockney's work):

3123:

So I don't think comments would be inappropriate in the AFD.

1657:

is also relevant for other philosophers' articles. – Editør (

836:

Talk:Martin Luther King, Jr. Day#Requested move 22 April 2016

604:

RfC on: should Timothy Leary be described as a "philosopher"?

272:

Leary wrote about philosophy, I'm thinking of works like the

210:

and a highly motivated editor kept at it for about a year at

5331: 5207: 5193: 5098: 2812: 2787:, but the exactly meaning obviously varies depending on the 2326:

Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

2223:

Knowledge:Peer review/Legalism (Chinese philosophy)/archive1

1266: 472: 4874:

Category:Articles with missing ISO 4 abbreviation redirects

4790:

Category:Articles with missing ISO 4 abbreviation redirects

3144:

Ah, so this IS an attempt to solicit comments for the AfD?

464: 5612:

beings. However, I do not see this anywhere on Knowledge.

2435:

and didn't see any glaring problems, except for a lack of

2162:

So I've gone ahead and made it a two-article dab page, to

5509:

Knowledge has many thousands of wikilinks which point to

4941:

the original article to remove the maintenance templates.

2763:

Book titled "Fields of Sense: A New Realist Ontology" by

2197:

so the disambiguation would make sense for that topic. --

734:

in the last 18 months referes to CFS as controversial.

630:

Medical Controversies – principles for category inclusion

5505:

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

4545:

Hello. I am currently involved in a disagreement at the

1894: 781:

clear from MEDRS that the controversy isn't over yet. --

449:

The discussion is closed. Should this RFC reflect that?

5458:

is excellent and exactly how this article should be. --

4613: 4493: 3978: 3903: 3900: 3856: 3853: 3539: 3536: 3349: 3318: 3013: 2995: 2890: 2886: 2269: 1753: 1749: 1745: 890: 869: 313: 309: 305: 301: 241:

article. The "philosopher" claim is currently cited to

3015:. Based on that, I am thinking maybe we should go to 4742:, Have you read what it says in the guidelines about 3847:

member, working under the pseudonym of "Mike Hockney"

1547: 2092:

Greetings WikiProject Philosophy/Archive 20 Members!

5486:. Just for reference, the article has already been 5478:Would someone from this WikiProject mind assessing 4515:You are invited to coment, ask questions and draft 2308:

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

1940:

Talk:Discipline_and_Punish#Crime_and_Punishment_.3F

1166:. Anyone is welcome to help clean it up. Thanks! — 826:There is a discussion underway to move the article 3905:. In my view, these threads should be deleted per 1398:Talk:Euclid_of_Megara#Requested_move_8_August_2016 976:Category:Interdisciplinary subfields of philosophy 927:Category:Interdisciplinary subfields of philosophy 5388:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Gender of rearing 4202:Thanks. I thought you would know what to do! -- 3105:and not at the Articles for Deletion discussion. 2968:That's a stopgap; someone should write an actual 2752:The book "Unity of philosophic experience" by By 1950:. I encountered someone who felt it was known as 1154: 337:There's a related discussion on the talk page at 3227:a reliable editor. (Until recent years, neither 2217:G'day, a peer review has been requested for the 1300:Requested move proposal, Martin Luther King, Jr. 771:on the controversies surrounding CFS. Here is a 728:http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2322800 637:The issues follow from discussions at CFS: Talk 269:Associates of Leary considered him a philosopher 4142:can you take a look at this discussion and the 3309:Hi, all. Opinions are needed on the following: 3233:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2115:Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report 278:Leary was not formally trained as a philosopher 5302:Does anybody care to create a stub article on 5283:Does anybody care to create a stub article on 4901:). Also verify that the dots are appropriate. 4356:, although I would advise people to read read 2050:Talk:Carl Jung#Requested move 14 November 2016 2023:Talk:Carl Jung#Requested move 14 November 2016 1425:Philosophy Undergraduate Degree = Philosopher? 432:Use of flag icons on genocide-related articles 4604:Opinions are needed on the following matter: 4484:Opinions are needed on the following matter: 2362:about merging the contents of that page into 2213:Peer review for Legalism (Chinese philosophy) 1553:doesn't really belong under Philosophy portal 834:. Please share your opinion on the matter at 703:Attachment of controversy to illness/disease: 8: 4585:. I suspect that we want to merge these. -- 2945:"logicians" (Knowledge is not a dictionary). 1800:(1995). "Explanation and Practical Reason". 1199:is rightfully listed as among our top 1,000 1155:Schiller's On the Aesthetic Education of Man 4830:. If you're interested in creating missing 2726:I looked into this some more, specifically 2567:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe3L5qjgyqU 2292:Talk:Pascal's wager#New paraphrase for lead 1279:Lenox; Being, Nature, and Life in Aristotle 176:You might wish to review the discussion at 110:If any of you has some time to review what 5250:Women in Red/English language mailing list 3346:Knowledge talk:Citation overkill#Citations 2642:should decide whether to have an article. 2494: 2489:https://en.wikipedia.org/User:KPU0/sandbox 2359:Talk:Inherently funny word#Proposed merger 1991:Philosophy info box: list of traditions... 956:Both seem to be sub-fields of philosophy. 5205:November 2017 prize-winning world contest 5181:Women in Red November contest open to all 5033:Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere. 3017:Knowledge Talk:WikiProject Disambiguation 3007:Knowledge Talk:WikiProject Disambiguation 2918:Knowledge Talk:WikiProject Disambiguation 4808:), and also help with compilations like 4523:in the light of new empirical evidence. 3624:. Hockney's (a self-professed member of 3077:Down at the bottom - see comments by me. 2679:. The question is not whether there is 1265:I concur. I find most of my sources on 1210:Any suggestions on where to go for good 1004:Should there be a series on "Certainty"? 4417:Errors in the Public Philosophy Article 3535:I just reverted Dchmelik's last edits ( 1806:. Harvard University Press. pp. 34–60. 1789: 1117:You are all invited to the discussion. 822:Neutral notification of move discussion 712:Sources defining a medical controversy: 5410: 4879: 4861: 4817: 4450:Hello! I am starting a rewrite of the 3344:Opinions are needed on the following: 2741:Collins Dictionary (of Harper-Collins) 2375: 2369: 2363: 2357: 2044:Greetings! I have recently relisted a 1841: 266:Leary considered himself a philosopher 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 4980:User:Hexatekin/sandbox/Afro-pessimism 4974:Infobox for a philosophical movement? 3252:, is not a major research university. 1899:University of Minnesota - Twin Cities 982:. The reason is to set it apart from 600:attention.05:39, 19 April 2016 (UTC) 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philosophy 7: 4889:versions of the abbreviations (e.g. 4816:. The category is populated by the 2972:article about the profession. Then 2756:describes "Cartesian mathematicism" 2225:. Thank you for your time. Regards, 1893:I am Bowen Yu, a Ph.D. student from 1832:. However, the text was adjusted on 1503:Kevin Gorman and women in philosophy 1067:Category:Sociocultural globalization 917:There are these two categories: (1) 274:eight-circuit model of consciousness 3483:Reminds me of the discussion about 2021:The discussion currently active at 1926: 1645:Desiderius Erasmus or just Erasmus? 1396:There's a page move discussion at 1275:Irwin, Aristotle's First Principles 1073:. Thank you in advance. Regards, 972:Knowledge:Categories for discussion 913:I need help with a category problem 5480:Maoist Theory of National Struggle 5474:Maoist Theory of National Struggle 4994:. The same goes, alternately, for 4247:Proposed article for deletion via 4224:Hey all! I recently stumbled upon 3873:If you mean Hyperreality Books is 2683:for the concept of a mathematical 2519:Experimentalism article needs work 2155:based on its usage as a calque of 1596:Should these 3 articles be merged? 1008:So apparently we have a series on 866:User_talk:Blue_Mist_1#nonexistence 682:Location of a medical controversy: 657:What a medical controversy is not: 595:Plato on Egyptian self cultivation 426:RfC on Genocide-related flag icons 24: 5297:The Routledge Companion to Ethics 4322:. Could use anther pair of eyes. 4292:Three Upbuilding Discourses, 1843 2728:Googling the term 'mathematicism' 2356:A discussion has been started at 1605:Social learning (social pedagogy) 5350:Today's articles for improvement 5117:Today's articles for improvement 5022: 4332:Dispute about philosophy journal 3393:Mathematical universe hypothesis 2822:Category:Criticism of monotheism 2808:Category:Criticism of monotheism 2617:Mathematical universe hypothesis 2598:Mathematical universe hypothesis 2315:Knowledge:Requests for adminship 2170:(the latter being a redirect to 1377:. Feel free to join in. Thanks! 1031:I have started a peer review of 941:to restructure them into (2)? – 923:Category:Subfields of philosophy 491:Today's articles for improvement 29: 5411:Quality issues with Descartes' 5254:Women in Red/international list 3829:, Hyperreality Books (actually 3491:. Can any of it be merged to 2246:missing topics about philosophy 919:Category:Branches of philosophy 888:The usage and primary topic of 5604:, I came across the idea that 5575:would be appreciated. Cheers! 5086:23:50, 23 September 2017 (UTC) 4362:User talk:Randykitty#A request 3674:Is unknowing sophistry of the 3336:Citation overkill proposal at 2106:2016 Community Wishlist Survey 1640:00:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC) 1591:05:07, 17 September 2016 (UTC) 1560:I just want to point out that 1271:Adler, Aristotle for Everybody 984:Category:Philosophy of science 647:Category:Medical controversies 214:, going so far as to edit the 1: 5591:19:12, 22 December 2017 (UTC) 5560:02:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 5500:08:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC) 5468:00:29, 22 November 2017 (UTC) 5449:08:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC) 5406:03:36, 13 November 2017 (UTC) 5376:00:06, 13 November 2017 (UTC) 5065: 5012:17:46, 6 September 2017 (UTC) 4273:. Comments are most welcome. 3489:independent secondary sources 2629:04:15, 19 February 2017 (UTC) 2619:article or somewhere else. -- 2583:03:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC) 2537:04:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC) 2513:14:02, 22 February 2017 (UTC) 2471:04:34, 19 February 2017 (UTC) 2449:04:26, 19 February 2017 (UTC) 2390:02:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC) 2347:01:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC) 2335:Many thanks and best wishes, 2219:Legalism (Chinese philosophy) 2072:01:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC) 2040:Requested move of "Carl Jung" 2035:08:51, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2006:00:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC) 1986:16:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 1922:23:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC) 1392:Euclid or Euclides of Megara? 1136:There is currently an rfc at 931:Category:Political philosophy 5622:09:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC) 5532:18:00, 3 December 2017 (UTC) 5319:13:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC) 5278:07:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC) 4838:Load up an article from the 3495:? I do find these Platonic 2559:16:19, 10 January 2017 (UTC) 2415:16:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC) 2303:06:20, 3 February 2017 (UTC) 2281:17:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC) 2137:18:06, 7 December 2016 (UTC) 1881:05:49, 16 October 2016 (UTC) 1854:23:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC) 1707:21:13, 10 October 2016 (UTC) 1689:19:10, 10 October 2016 (UTC) 1363:There is a discussion about 980:Category:Philosophy by topic 778:2015 news article in Science 5176:11:34, 6 October 2017 (UTC) 5143:00:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC) 5000:Template:Philosophy sidebar 4984:Template:Philosophy sidebar 4969:13:26, 31 August 2017 (UTC) 4756:23:11, 17 August 2017 (UTC) 4722:16:32, 17 August 2017 (UTC) 4696:13:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC) 4675:20:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC) 4658:18:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC) 4600:RfC: Red links in infoboxes 3506:What the Bleep Do We Know!? 2493:i need help to finish it, 2258:15:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC) 2235:00:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC) 2207:19:58, 1 January 2017 (UTC) 2188:19:10, 1 January 2017 (UTC) 1663:09:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC) 1573:, which in turn influenced 1543:23:43, 16 August 2016 (UTC) 1521:01:05, 13 August 2016 (UTC) 1498:02:33, 11 August 2016 (UTC) 828:Martin Luther King, Jr. Day 802:(Open Letter to The Lancet) 542:Defeasible (disambiguation) 5637: 5515:WikiProject Disambiguation 5378:on behalf of the TAFI team 5145:on behalf of the TAFI team 5020: 4914:and someone will help you. 4261:01:09, 20 March 2017 (UTC) 4242:19:36, 17 March 2017 (UTC) 4128:07:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC) 4106:21:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC) 4075:21:02, 27 April 2017 (UTC) 4048:Category:Critical thinking 4039:Critical thinking category 3842:chapter 1 (The Illuminati) 3331:23:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC) 3210:00:54, 27 March 2017 (UTC) 3189:00:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC) 3175:00:41, 27 March 2017 (UTC) 3154:00:37, 27 March 2017 (UTC) 3140:00:06, 27 March 2017 (UTC) 3115:23:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC) 3096:23:49, 26 March 2017 (UTC) 3056:04:15, 25 March 2017 (UTC) 3029:03:43, 25 March 2017 (UTC) 2986:01:55, 25 March 2017 (UTC) 2929:22:05, 24 March 2017 (UTC) 2903:17:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC) 2872:15:54, 24 March 2017 (UTC) 2845:11:47, 19 March 2017 (UTC) 2433:History of logic#Aristotle 1571:Situationist International 1482:13:14, 3 August 2016 (UTC) 1458:19:04, 2 August 2016 (UTC) 1420:08:12, 8 August 2016 (UTC) 966:12:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC) 951:23:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC) 935:Category:Social philosophy 849:03:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC) 832:Martin Luther King Jr. Day 814:11:03, 21 April 2016 (UTC) 791:00:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC) 773:2015 Lancet position paper 763:23:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC) 748:16:28, 19 April 2016 (UTC) 625:18:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC) 587:03:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC) 569:10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC) 554:03:38, 13 April 2016 (UTC) 519:on behalf of the TAFI team 517:00:07, 18 April 2016 (UTC) 459:10:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC) 412:10:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC) 326:23:15, 30 March 2016 (UTC) 296:18:34, 30 March 2016 (UTC) 259:03:59, 30 March 2016 (UTC) 233:00:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC) 194:22:07, 29 March 2016 (UTC) 172:21:58, 29 March 2016 (UTC) 153:21:27, 29 March 2016 (UTC) 129:13:09, 29 March 2016 (UTC) 5425:It's in an abysmal state! 5357:to appear on Knowledge's 5258:Women in Red/Opt-out list 5221:November 2017 WiR Contest 5189: 5187: 5124:to appear on Knowledge's 5037:This may be of interest: 4860:THAT THE ABBREVIATION IN 4626:13:33, 24 July 2017 (UTC) 4595:06:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC) 4560:08:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC) 4536:04:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC) 3451:The Armageddon Conspiracy 3412:The Armageddon Conspiracy 3291:01:29, 2 April 2017 (UTC) 2833:Categories for discussion 2801:21:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC) 2715:21:01, 5 March 2017 (UTC) 2697:20:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC) 2652:15:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC) 2046:requested move discussion 1867:is under discussion, see 1651:requested move discussion 1439:01:34, 14 July 2016 (UTC) 1387:08:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC) 1354:21:55, 14 July 2016 (UTC) 1313:11:14, 11 July 2016 (UTC) 1186:04:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC) 1171:16:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC) 1150:06:23, 22 June 2016 (UTC) 894:is under discussion, see 830:(with a single comma) to 721:The Specific case of CFS: 498:to appear on Knowledge's 444:23:32, 5 April 2016 (UTC) 355:13:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC) 5235:WikiProject Women in Red 4988:African-American studies 4842:(or only check for e.g. 4637:There is a new article, 4506:01:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC) 4472:02:36, 8 June 2017 (UTC) 4438:00:13, 7 June 2017 (UTC) 4411:04:43, 6 June 2017 (UTC) 4392:03:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC) 4347:02:45, 6 June 2017 (UTC) 4327:08:29, 24 May 2017 (UTC) 4307:19:16, 20 May 2017 (UTC) 4283:04:49, 16 May 2017 (UTC) 4212:14:14, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 4191:01:57, 12 May 2017 (UTC) 4157:09:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC) 4114:To be more precise, per 4025:00:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC) 3991:14:53, 13 May 2017 (UTC) 3958:01:44, 11 May 2017 (UTC) 3927:14:10, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3891:12:53, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3868:12:42, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3825:(outdent) Mike Hockney, 3804:12:35, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3753:12:26, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3707:11:47, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3646:11:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3589:11:08, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3555:11:07, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3519:09:39, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3471:09:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 3387:08:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC) 3348:. A permalink for it is 3121:criteria for canvassing. 2912:itself is a redirect to 2747:Oxford Living Dictionary 1338:21:40, 2 July 2016 (UTC) 1292:22:02, 2 July 2016 (UTC) 1261:19:11, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 1240:13:22, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 1225:08:51, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 1127:19:29, 3 June 2016 (UTC) 1106:17:26, 3 June 2016 (UTC) 1083:14:58, 29 May 2016 (UTC) 1053:Globalization categories 1048:16:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC) 1022:00:45, 13 May 2016 (UTC) 974:decided now to nominate 434:. Please comment there. 5454:To my mind → French WP 5420:Discourse on the method 5413:Discourse on the method 4744:WP:No original research 3676:argument from authority 3440:19:58, 9 May 2017 (UTC) 3405:17:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC) 3362:07:00, 9 May 2017 (UTC) 2961:should be redirects to 2779:is too long to include. 2455:law of noncontradiction 1840:has a May 2010 quote (" 1803:Philosophical Arguments 1769:removed the following: 996:20:37, 5 May 2016 (UTC) 908:06:50, 4 May 2016 (UTC) 5456:Discours de la méthode 5336: 5212: 5198: 5103: 5044:The goal is to adjust 4579:Type–token distinction 4567:Type–token distinction 4226:Condition (philosophy) 4220:Condition (philosophy) 3366: 3000:Talk:Logicians#Changes 2817: 2352:Inherently funny words 2268:editor last June here 2151:, which redirected to 2086: 1615:Public sphere pedagogy 1610:Social learning theory 1249:Knowledge:Book sources 1164:put it in my userspace 477: 5543:Infinity (philosophy) 5335: 5211: 5197: 5102: 4851:maintenance templates 4771:ISO 4 redirects help! 4639:Individual Philosophy 4632:Individual Philosophy 4446:Evidentialism rewrite 4186:Tell me all about it. 4164:Logic and rationality 4092:What might be cited? 2816: 2285: 2195:abstract and concrete 2085: 1956:Discipline and Punish 896:DRAFT TALK:Usurpation 878:User:Kku/Nonexistence 476: 42:of past discussions. 5396:is up for deletion. 5064:should be injected. 4805:Journal of Physics A 4583:Type–token relations 4571:Type–token_relations 4552:FreeKnowledgeCreator 4547:Fashionable Nonsense 4541:Fashionable Nonsense 4478:WP:Citation overkill 3338:WP:Citation overkill 2703:article in Discovery 1952:Crime and Punishment 1927:Alternate title for 1670:Paradox of tolerance 1321:Reductio ad absurdum 1304:Please comment on a 1178:FreeKnowledgeCreator 1027:Peer review of life. 318:FreeKnowledgeCreator 312:, and that was also 251:FreeKnowledgeCreator 186:FreeKnowledgeCreator 145:FreeKnowledgeCreator 112:FreeKnowledgeCreator 5017:RfC on human titles 4844:Philosophy journals 4577:We have an article 4172:every single aspect 2240:Missing topics list 1948:Surveiller et punir 1933:Surveiller et punir 1778:practical reasoning 1160:The current article 921:(maybe soon called 806:In Vitro Infidelium 769:2015 Lancet article 740:In Vitro Infidelium 608:There is an RfC at 5353:. The article was 5337: 5213: 5199: 5163:Talk:Karl_Marx#RfC 5120:. The article was 5104: 4046:has been removing 3911:original synthesis 3250:Pacific University 3248:2. the publisher, 2818: 2806:CfD nomination of 2608:this 'documentary' 2606:. There was also 2427:I'm not expert on 2087: 1895:GroupLens Research 1655:Desiderius Erasmus 610:Talk:Timothy Leary 494:. The article was 478: 5600:When researching 5438: 5433:original research 5394:Gender of rearing 5384: 5383: 5341:Please note that 5266: 5265: 5261: 5237: 5223: 5151: 5150: 5108:Please note that 4528:Damir Ibrisimovic 4409: 4345: 4187: 4168:Critical thinking 4144:Critical Thinking 4060:Critical thinking 3915:original research 3621:Annals of Physics 3193:I am ambivalent. 2963:list of logicians 2948:I would propose: 2870: 2515: 2499:comment added by 2139: 2074: 2068: 2033: 1984: 1912:Thank you, Bowen 1359:Theology template 649: 536:is a redirect to 525: 524: 482:Please note that 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5628: 5610:four-dimensional 5583: 5573:Draft:Comparison 5566:Draft:Comparison 5436: 5374: 5371: 5359:Community portal 5328: 5327: 5247: 5240: 5238: 5233: 5226: 5224: 5219: 5185: 5184: 5174: 5141: 5138: 5126:Community portal 5095: 5094: 5084: 5034: 5026: 5025: 4996:Africana studies 4967: 4930: 4924: 4900: 4896: 4892: 4881: 4864:IS CORRECT FIRST 4863: 4829: 4823: 4819: 4783: 4777: 4462: 4408: 4406: 4390: 4344: 4269:. Discussion is 4201: 4189: 4185: 4182: 4141: 4103: 4098: 4090: 4071: 3206: 3198: 3171: 3163: 3136: 3128: 3092: 3084: 2925: 2881:FYI. I changed 2865: 2701:Here is another 2674: 2463: 2426: 2407: 2396:History of Logic 2299: 2273:ManKnowsInfinity 2227:AustralianRupert 2134: 2107: 2070: 2066: 2058: 2031:(talk)(contribs) 2029: 2016:Carl Gustav Jung 1962: 1834:12 November 2011 1830:Jayaguru-Shishya 1817: 1816: 1794: 1761: 1743: 1637: 1628: 1583:StrangeAttractor 1478: 1468: 1417: 1408: 1372: 1366: 1351: 1335: 1289: 978:for renaming to 893: 862:User:Blue_Mist_1 645: 515: 512: 500:Community portal 469: 468: 347: 247:Michael Horowitz 225: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5636: 5635: 5631: 5630: 5629: 5627: 5626: 5625: 5598: 5577: 5569: 5539: 5507: 5476: 5416: 5391: 5379: 5369: 5365: 5326: 5311:189.122.198.138 5289: 5256:. Unsubscribe: 5248:(To subscribe: 5232: 5230: 5218: 5216: 5206: 5183: 5165: 5159: 5146: 5136: 5132: 5093: 5082: 5035: 5032: 5030: 5023: 5019: 4976: 4946: 4928: 4922: 4898: 4894: 4890: 4882:should contain 4827: 4825:Infobox journal 4821: 4794:ISO 4 redirects 4781: 4779:Infobox journal 4775: 4773: 4635: 4602: 4575: 4543: 4526:Enjoy the day, 4513: 4511:You are Invited 4482: 4469: 4460: 4448: 4419: 4402: 4396:There is now a 4369: 4334: 4316: 4295: 4222: 4195: 4178: 4176: 4135: 4101: 4094: 4080: 4069: 4041: 3691:German Idealism 3396: 3371: 3368:Graham's number 3342: 3307: 3204: 3196: 3169: 3161: 3134: 3126: 3090: 3082: 3074: 3040:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 3019:after all. -- 2923: 2879: 2854: 2811: 2668: 2546: 2524:Experimentalism 2521: 2481: 2459: 2420: 2403: 2399: 2354: 2310: 2297: 2288: 2265: 2242: 2215: 2164:abstract object 2145: 2105: 2095: 2080: 2056: 2042: 2019: 1993: 1944:Michel Foucault 1936: 1929:Michel Foucault 1888: 1869:talk:Veneration 1861: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1813: 1798:Taylor, Charles 1796: 1795: 1791: 1734: 1718: 1715: 1673: 1668:Need Help with 1647: 1631: 1623: 1598: 1555: 1530: 1505: 1490:Fustbariclation 1476: 1462: 1427: 1411: 1402: 1394: 1370: 1364: 1361: 1349: 1333: 1325: 1302: 1287: 1194: 1157: 1134: 1132:Michel Foucault 1115: 1112:Merger Proposal 1090: 1055: 1029: 1006: 915: 889: 886: 858: 847: 838:. Thank you. — 824: 632: 606: 597: 530: 520: 510: 506: 467: 428: 343: 221: 212:Stefan Molyneux 108: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5634: 5632: 5614:LaundryPizza03 5597: 5594: 5568: 5563: 5538: 5535: 5511:disambiguation 5506: 5503: 5475: 5472: 5471: 5470: 5423: 5415: 5409: 5398:Flyer22 Reborn 5390: 5385: 5382: 5381: 5363: 5362: 5340: 5325: 5322: 5288: 5281: 5264: 5263: 5243: 5242: 5228: 5227: 5203:Women in Red's 5200: 5192: 5190: 5188: 5182: 5179: 5158: 5152: 5149: 5148: 5130: 5129: 5107: 5092: 5089: 5080: 5062:WP:GREATWRONGS 5055: 5021: 5018: 5015: 4992:Pan-Africanism 4975: 4972: 4943: 4942: 4932: 4918: 4917: 4916: 4915: 4908: 4906: 4904: 4902: 4880:|abbreviation= 4877: 4867: 4866: 4862:|abbreviation= 4854: 4847: 4818:|abbreviation= 4772: 4769: 4767: 4765: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4759: 4758: 4730: 4729: 4728: 4727: 4726: 4725: 4701: 4700: 4699: 4698: 4681: 4680: 4679: 4678: 4634: 4629: 4618:Flyer22 Reborn 4601: 4598: 4581:, and another 4574: 4563: 4542: 4539: 4521:talk:free will 4512: 4509: 4498:Flyer22 Reborn 4481: 4475: 4467: 4447: 4444: 4443: 4442: 4441: 4440: 4418: 4415: 4414: 4413: 4394: 4333: 4330: 4315: 4310: 4294: 4289: 4288: 4287: 4286: 4285: 4230:personal essay 4221: 4218: 4217: 4216: 4215: 4214: 4204:David Tornheim 4149:David Tornheim 4133: 4132: 4131: 4130: 4109: 4108: 4096:Blue Rasberry 4040: 4037: 4036: 4035: 4034: 4033: 4032: 4031: 4030: 4029: 4028: 4027: 4000: 3999: 3998: 3997: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3993: 3974:Who says that 3965: 3964: 3963: 3962: 3961: 3960: 3932: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3894: 3893: 3823: 3822: 3821: 3820: 3819: 3818: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3811: 3810: 3809: 3808: 3807: 3806: 3770: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3763: 3762: 3761: 3760: 3759: 3758: 3757: 3756: 3755: 3722: 3721: 3720: 3719: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3715: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3711: 3710: 3709: 3659: 3658: 3657: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3653: 3652: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3626:the Illuminati 3600: 3599: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3591: 3564: 3563: 3562: 3561: 3560: 3559: 3558: 3557: 3526: 3525: 3524: 3523: 3522: 3521: 3511:David Tornheim 3476: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3443: 3442: 3395: 3390: 3379:David Tornheim 3370: 3365: 3354:Flyer22 Reborn 3341: 3334: 3323:Flyer22 Reborn 3306: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3293: 3277: 3274: 3271: 3263: 3262: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3256: 3253: 3246: 3237: 3236: 3223: 3222: 3221: 3220: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3216: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3212: 3073: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3059: 3058: 3021:David Tornheim 3010: 3003: 2989: 2988: 2966: 2953:For now, both 2946: 2895:David Tornheim 2878: 2875: 2868:old fashioned! 2853: 2851:Nader El-Bizri 2848: 2810: 2804: 2793:David Tornheim 2781: 2780: 2777:Alain Badiou 2765:Markus Gabriel 2761: 2754:Etienne Gilson 2750: 2744: 2738: 2724: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2719: 2718: 2717: 2707:David Tornheim 2699: 2689:David Tornheim 2659: 2658: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2621:David Tornheim 2586: 2585: 2545: 2540: 2520: 2517: 2480: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2441:David Tornheim 2398: 2393: 2377:Humor research 2353: 2350: 2339:Anna Frodesiak 2330: 2329: 2309: 2306: 2287: 2286:Pascal's wager 2284: 2264: 2261: 2241: 2238: 2214: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2144: 2141: 2129:Best regards, 2118: 2117: 2089: 2079: 2076: 2041: 2038: 2027:—Roman Spinner 2018: 2009: 1992: 1989: 1935: 1925: 1903:meta-wiki page 1887: 1884: 1860: 1857: 1826:added recently 1819: 1818: 1811: 1788: 1787: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1763: 1762: 1714: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1672: 1666: 1646: 1643: 1618: 1617: 1612: 1607: 1597: 1594: 1554: 1546: 1529: 1524: 1504: 1501: 1485: 1484: 1460: 1444:No, otherwise 1426: 1423: 1393: 1390: 1360: 1357: 1324: 1316: 1301: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1243: 1242: 1217:David Tornheim 1201:Vital articles 1193: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1156: 1153: 1133: 1130: 1114: 1109: 1089: 1086: 1054: 1051: 1028: 1025: 1005: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 914: 911: 885: 882: 857: 852: 843: 823: 820: 819: 818: 817: 816: 794: 793: 765: 700: 699: 695: 694: 690: 689: 679: 678: 674: 673: 669: 668: 664: 663: 631: 628: 605: 602: 596: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 572: 571: 538:Falsifiability 529: 526: 523: 522: 504: 503: 481: 466: 463: 462: 461: 427: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 419: 418: 417: 416: 415: 414: 390: 389: 388: 387: 386: 385: 384: 383: 382: 381: 335: 334: 333: 332: 331: 330: 329: 328: 284: 283: 282: 279: 276: 270: 267: 261: 201: 200: 199: 198: 197: 196: 156: 155: 107: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5633: 5624: 5623: 5619: 5615: 5611: 5607: 5603: 5596:Missing topic 5595: 5593: 5592: 5589: 5588: 5584: 5582: 5581: 5574: 5567: 5564: 5562: 5561: 5557: 5553: 5549: 5548:Deacon Vorbis 5544: 5536: 5534: 5533: 5530: 5525: 5524: 5519: 5516: 5512: 5504: 5502: 5501: 5497: 5493: 5489: 5485: 5481: 5473: 5469: 5465: 5461: 5460:2.247.246.125 5457: 5453: 5452: 5451: 5450: 5446: 5442: 5434: 5430: 5426: 5421: 5414: 5408: 5407: 5403: 5399: 5395: 5389: 5386: 5380: 5377: 5373: 5372: 5364:Delivered by 5360: 5356: 5352: 5351: 5346: 5345: 5334: 5330: 5329: 5321: 5320: 5316: 5312: 5307: 5305: 5300: 5298: 5294: 5286: 5282: 5280: 5279: 5275: 5271: 5262: 5259: 5255: 5251: 5245: 5244: 5241: 5239: 5236: 5225: 5222: 5210: 5204: 5196: 5191: 5186: 5180: 5178: 5177: 5172: 5168: 5164: 5157: 5153: 5147: 5144: 5140: 5139: 5131:Delivered by 5127: 5123: 5119: 5118: 5113: 5112: 5101: 5097: 5096: 5088: 5087: 5078: 5075: 5072: 5070: 5063: 5059: 5053: 5051: 5047: 5046:MOS:JOBTITLES 5042: 5040: 5029: 5016: 5014: 5013: 5009: 5005: 5001: 4997: 4993: 4989: 4985: 4981: 4973: 4971: 4970: 4965: 4961: 4957: 4953: 4949: 4940: 4936: 4933: 4927: 4920: 4919: 4913: 4909: 4907: 4905: 4903: 4888: 4887: 4878: 4875: 4871: 4870: 4869: 4868: 4865: 4859: 4855: 4852: 4848: 4845: 4841: 4837: 4836: 4835: 4833: 4826: 4820:parameter of 4815: 4811: 4807: 4806: 4801: 4800: 4795: 4791: 4787: 4784:now features 4780: 4770: 4768: 4757: 4753: 4749: 4745: 4741: 4738: 4737: 4736: 4735: 4734: 4733: 4732: 4731: 4723: 4719: 4715: 4710: 4707: 4706: 4705: 4704: 4703: 4702: 4697: 4693: 4689: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4676: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4663: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4659: 4655: 4651: 4646: 4644: 4640: 4633: 4630: 4628: 4627: 4623: 4619: 4615: 4611: 4607: 4599: 4597: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4584: 4580: 4572: 4568: 4564: 4562: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4548: 4540: 4538: 4537: 4533: 4529: 4524: 4522: 4518: 4510: 4508: 4507: 4503: 4499: 4495: 4491: 4487: 4479: 4476: 4474: 4473: 4470: 4465: 4463: 4457: 4453: 4452:evidentialism 4445: 4439: 4435: 4431: 4427: 4426: 4425: 4424: 4423: 4416: 4412: 4407: 4405: 4399: 4395: 4393: 4388: 4384: 4380: 4376: 4372: 4367: 4363: 4359: 4355: 4351: 4350: 4349: 4348: 4343: 4339: 4331: 4329: 4328: 4325: 4321: 4314: 4311: 4309: 4308: 4304: 4300: 4293: 4290: 4284: 4280: 4276: 4272: 4268: 4264: 4263: 4262: 4258: 4254: 4250: 4246: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4239: 4235: 4231: 4227: 4219: 4213: 4209: 4205: 4199: 4194: 4193: 4192: 4188: 4183: 4181: 4173: 4169: 4165: 4161: 4160: 4159: 4158: 4154: 4150: 4145: 4139: 4129: 4125: 4121: 4117: 4113: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4107: 4104: 4099: 4097: 4088: 4084: 4079: 4078: 4077: 4076: 4073: 4072: 4063: 4061: 4057: 4053: 4052:Occam's razor 4049: 4045: 4044:‎Marcocapelle 4038: 4026: 4022: 4018: 4014: 4010: 4009: 4008: 4007: 4006: 4005: 4004: 4003: 4002: 4001: 3992: 3988: 3984: 3980: 3979:took the term 3977: 3973: 3972: 3971: 3970: 3969: 3968: 3967: 3966: 3959: 3955: 3951: 3947: 3942: 3938: 3937: 3936: 3935: 3934: 3933: 3928: 3924: 3920: 3916: 3912: 3908: 3904: 3901: 3898: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3892: 3888: 3884: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3869: 3865: 3861: 3857: 3854: 3850: 3848: 3843: 3839: 3836: 3832: 3828: 3805: 3801: 3797: 3793: 3788: 3787: 3786: 3785: 3784: 3783: 3782: 3781: 3780: 3779: 3778: 3777: 3776: 3775: 3774: 3773: 3772: 3771: 3754: 3750: 3746: 3742: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3735: 3734: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3730: 3729: 3728: 3727: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3723: 3708: 3704: 3700: 3696: 3692: 3688: 3687: 3682: 3677: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3667: 3666: 3665: 3664: 3663: 3662: 3661: 3660: 3647: 3643: 3639: 3635: 3631: 3627: 3623: 3622: 3617: 3612: 3611: 3610: 3609: 3608: 3607: 3606: 3605: 3604: 3603: 3602: 3601: 3590: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3570: 3569: 3568: 3567: 3566: 3565: 3556: 3552: 3548: 3544: 3540: 3537: 3534: 3533: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3520: 3516: 3512: 3508: 3507: 3502: 3498: 3494: 3493:mathematicism 3490: 3486: 3485:mathematicism 3482: 3481: 3480: 3479: 3478: 3477: 3472: 3468: 3464: 3460: 3456: 3452: 3447: 3446: 3445: 3444: 3441: 3437: 3433: 3429: 3425: 3421: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3406: 3403: 3402: 3394: 3391: 3389: 3388: 3384: 3380: 3376: 3369: 3364: 3363: 3359: 3355: 3351: 3347: 3339: 3335: 3333: 3332: 3328: 3324: 3320: 3316: 3312: 3304: 3300: 3292: 3288: 3284: 3283: 3278: 3275: 3272: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3264: 3257: 3254: 3251: 3247: 3243: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3239: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3225: 3224: 3211: 3208: 3207: 3200: 3199: 3192: 3191: 3190: 3186: 3182: 3178: 3177: 3176: 3173: 3172: 3165: 3164: 3157: 3156: 3155: 3151: 3147: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3138: 3137: 3130: 3129: 3122: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3112: 3108: 3104: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3094: 3093: 3086: 3085: 3078: 3057: 3053: 3049: 3045: 3041: 3036: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3026: 3022: 3018: 3014: 3011: 3008: 3004: 3001: 2997: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2975: 2971: 2967: 2964: 2960: 2956: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2947: 2944: 2940: 2936: 2932: 2931: 2930: 2927: 2926: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2900: 2896: 2892: 2888: 2884: 2876: 2874: 2873: 2869: 2863: 2859: 2852: 2849: 2847: 2846: 2842: 2838: 2834: 2830: 2829: 2824: 2823: 2815: 2809: 2805: 2803: 2802: 2798: 2794: 2790: 2786: 2778: 2774: 2773:mathematicism 2770: 2766: 2762: 2759: 2755: 2751: 2748: 2745: 2742: 2739: 2736: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2729: 2716: 2712: 2708: 2704: 2700: 2698: 2694: 2690: 2686: 2682: 2678: 2672: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2661: 2660: 2653: 2649: 2645: 2640: 2639: 2638: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2630: 2626: 2622: 2618: 2614: 2609: 2605: 2602: 2599: 2595: 2590: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2544: 2543:Mathematicism 2541: 2539: 2538: 2534: 2530: 2525: 2518: 2516: 2514: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2498: 2491: 2490: 2486: 2478: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2462: 2456: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2446: 2442: 2438: 2434: 2430: 2424: 2419: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2412: 2408: 2406: 2397: 2394: 2392: 2391: 2387: 2383: 2379: 2378: 2373: 2372: 2367: 2366: 2361: 2360: 2351: 2349: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2336: 2333: 2328: 2327: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2318: 2316: 2307: 2305: 2304: 2301: 2300: 2293: 2283: 2282: 2278: 2274: 2270: 2260: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2248:is updated - 2247: 2239: 2237: 2236: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2173: 2169: 2165: 2160: 2158: 2157:Drittes Reich 2154: 2150: 2142: 2140: 2138: 2132: 2127: 2124: 2121: 2116: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2109: 2108: 2101: 2100:one-time-only 2096: 2094: 2093: 2084: 2077: 2075: 2073: 2069: 2063: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2051: 2047: 2039: 2037: 2036: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2017: 2013: 2010: 2008: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1990: 1988: 1987: 1982: 1978: 1974: 1970: 1966: 1961: 1957: 1953: 1949: 1945: 1941: 1934: 1930: 1924: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1910: 1906: 1904: 1900: 1896: 1891: 1885: 1883: 1882: 1878: 1874: 1873:65.94.171.217 1870: 1866: 1863:The topic of 1858: 1856: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1831: 1827: 1814: 1812:9780674664760 1809: 1805: 1804: 1799: 1793: 1790: 1786: 1779: 1775: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1768: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1742: 1738: 1733: 1729: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1686: 1682: 1676: 1671: 1667: 1665: 1664: 1660: 1656: 1652: 1644: 1642: 1641: 1638: 1635: 1629: 1627: 1616: 1613: 1611: 1608: 1606: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1595: 1593: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1563: 1558: 1552: 1551: 1545: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1528: 1525: 1523: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1510: 1502: 1500: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1483: 1480: 1479: 1472: 1466: 1461: 1459: 1455: 1451: 1447: 1446:David Cameron 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1424: 1422: 1421: 1418: 1416: 1415: 1409: 1407: 1406: 1399: 1391: 1389: 1388: 1384: 1380: 1376: 1369: 1358: 1356: 1355: 1352: 1345: 1340: 1339: 1336: 1330: 1323: 1322: 1317: 1315: 1314: 1311: 1307: 1299: 1293: 1290: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1245: 1244: 1241: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1213: 1208: 1204: 1202: 1198: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1169: 1165: 1161: 1152: 1151: 1148: 1144: 1139: 1131: 1129: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1113: 1110: 1108: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1094: 1087: 1085: 1084: 1080: 1076: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1059:Globalization 1052: 1050: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1034: 1026: 1024: 1023: 1019: 1015: 1011: 1003: 997: 993: 989: 985: 981: 977: 973: 969: 968: 967: 963: 959: 955: 954: 953: 952: 948: 944: 940: 939:Knowledge:CFD 936: 932: 928: 924: 920: 912: 910: 909: 905: 901: 897: 892: 883: 881: 879: 875: 871: 867: 863: 856: 853: 851: 850: 846: 841: 840:Malik Shabazz 837: 833: 829: 821: 815: 811: 807: 803: 798: 797: 796: 795: 792: 788: 784: 779: 774: 770: 766: 764: 760: 756: 752: 751: 750: 749: 745: 741: 735: 733: 729: 723: 722: 718: 714: 713: 709: 705: 704: 697: 696: 692: 691: 686: 685: 684: 683: 676: 675: 671: 670: 666: 665: 661: 660: 659: 658: 654: 651: 648: 641: 640: 635: 629: 627: 626: 622: 618: 614: 611: 603: 601: 594: 588: 584: 580: 576: 575: 574: 573: 570: 566: 562: 558: 557: 556: 555: 551: 547: 543: 539: 535: 534:Defeasibility 527: 521: 518: 514: 513: 505:Delivered by 501: 497: 493: 492: 487: 486: 475: 471: 470: 460: 456: 452: 448: 447: 446: 445: 441: 437: 436:Fyunck(click) 433: 425: 413: 409: 405: 400: 399: 398: 397: 396: 395: 394: 393: 392: 391: 379: 375: 371: 367: 366: 365: 364: 363: 362: 361: 360: 359: 358: 357: 356: 353: 352: 348: 346: 340: 327: 323: 319: 315: 311: 307: 303: 299: 298: 297: 293: 289: 285: 280: 277: 275: 271: 268: 265: 264: 262: 260: 256: 252: 248: 244: 240: 239:Timothy Leary 236: 235: 234: 231: 230: 226: 224: 217: 213: 209: 205: 204: 203: 202: 195: 191: 187: 183: 179: 175: 174: 173: 169: 165: 160: 159: 158: 157: 154: 150: 146: 142: 137: 136:Timothy Leary 133: 132: 131: 130: 126: 122: 117: 116:Timothy Leary 113: 105: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5599: 5586: 5579: 5578: 5570: 5541:The article 5540: 5526: 5520: 5508: 5477: 5441:89.15.239.96 5432: 5424: 5417: 5392: 5367: 5348: 5342: 5338: 5308: 5304:Preferentism 5301: 5296: 5290: 5285:Preferentism 5267: 5246: 5234: 5220: 5214: 5202: 5160: 5134: 5115: 5109: 5105: 5068: 5049: 5043: 5036: 4977: 4944: 4926:R from ISO 4 4883: 4857: 4856: 4849:One or more 4803: 4797: 4774: 4766: 4748:CaroleHenson 4708: 4650:CaroleHenson 4647: 4636: 4610:WP:Permalink 4603: 4587:179.210.72.9 4576: 4544: 4525: 4514: 4490:WP:Permalink 4483: 4449: 4420: 4403: 4335: 4317: 4296: 4223: 4198:MjolnirPants 4180:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants 4179: 4171: 4138:MjolnirPants 4134: 4120:Marcocapelle 4095: 4087:Marcocapelle 4068: 4064: 4042: 3983:Omnipaedista 3940: 3919:Omnipaedista 3860:Omnipaedista 3851: 3845: 3838:Google Books 3835:according to 3827:The God Game 3826: 3824: 3745:Omnipaedista 3684: 3680: 3638:Omnipaedista 3634:The God Game 3633: 3619: 3616:Random House 3547:Omnipaedista 3504: 3501:epistemology 3488: 3450: 3432:Omnipaedista 3411: 3400: 3397: 3372: 3343: 3315:WP:Permalink 3308: 3280: 3232: 3228: 3203: 3195: 3168: 3160: 3133: 3125: 3102: 3089: 3081: 3075: 2942: 2922: 2880: 2855: 2826: 2820: 2819: 2782: 2772: 2725: 2547: 2529:Ollyoxenfree 2527:doctoring?-- 2522: 2495:— Preceding 2492: 2482: 2460: 2404: 2400: 2355: 2337: 2334: 2331: 2324: 2319: 2311: 2296: 2289: 2266: 2243: 2216: 2175: 2172:Nazi Germany 2161: 2156: 2153:Nazi Germany 2146: 2131:Stevietheman 2128: 2125: 2122: 2119: 2103: 2099: 2097: 2091: 2090: 2088: 2054: 2053: 2043: 2020: 1998:Ollyoxenfree 1994: 1960:TonyTheTiger 1955: 1954:rather than 1951: 1937: 1911: 1907: 1892: 1889: 1862: 1859:"Veneration" 1823: 1802: 1792: 1784: 1773: 1764: 1677: 1674: 1648: 1633: 1625: 1619: 1599: 1559: 1556: 1548: 1535:Josh Milburn 1531: 1513:Josh Milburn 1506: 1486: 1475: 1450:Ollyoxenfree 1428: 1413: 1412: 1404: 1403: 1395: 1362: 1341: 1331:. Thanks -- 1326: 1319: 1318:Conflict at 1303: 1267:Google Books 1209: 1205: 1195: 1158: 1135: 1116: 1098:Ollyoxenfree 1091: 1056: 1030: 1007: 916: 900:70.51.200.96 887: 884:"Usurpation" 859: 855:nonexistence 825: 736: 724: 720: 719: 715: 711: 710: 706: 702: 701: 681: 680: 656: 655: 652: 642: 636: 633: 607: 598: 531: 528:Defeasiblity 508: 489: 483: 479: 429: 377: 373: 370:Noam Chomsky 350: 344: 336: 304:, which was 228: 222: 140: 109: 78: 43: 37: 5201:Announcing 5069:SMcCandlish 5050:proper name 4912:WT:JOURNALS 4886:title cased 4834:redirects: 4519:changes at 4354:WT:JOURNALS 4320:Synergetics 4299:Philafrenzy 3976:Tim Maudlin 3741:red herring 3681:Pythagorean 3373:There is a 3301:RfC on the 2671:JustinBlank 2644:JustinBlank 2613:JustinBlank 2575:JustinBlank 2382:Sangdeboeuf 2290:Please see 2244:My list of 2199:Mark viking 2168:Third Reich 2149:Third Realm 2143:Third Realm 2135:Delivered: 1890:Hello all, 1767:recent edit 1699:Mark viking 1681:Wikishagnik 1253:Mark viking 1119:Lbertolotti 1093:Philosopher 970:We over at 783:Mark viking 755:Ozzie10aaaa 339:Philosopher 288:Mark viking 216:Philosopher 36:This is an 5309:Thanks -- 4814:WP:JCW/TAR 4799:J. Phys. A 4643:Philosophy 4612:for it is 4492:for it is 4458:. Thanks! 4430:Hypatiagal 3875:Lulu Press 3831:Lulu Press 3497:ontologies 3455:ad hominem 3375:discussion 3317:for it is 3181:Exemplo347 3146:Exemplo347 3107:Exemplo347 2828:discussion 2735:Britannica 2423:MisterCake 2098:This is a 1977:WP:CHICAGO 1865:Veneration 1785:References 1774:Ad hominem 1720:Ad hominem 1713:Ad hominem 1626:PermStrump 1310:Randy Kryn 925:) and (2) 891:Usurpation 874:Parmenides 532:Currently 98:Archive 24 90:Archive 22 85:Archive 21 79:Archive 20 73:Archive 19 68:Archive 18 60:Archive 15 5602:polychora 5492:Marchjuly 5429:Talk page 5355:scheduled 5156:Karl Marx 5122:scheduled 5004:Hexatekin 4645:, other? 4517:Free will 4461:RileyBugz 4265:Moved to 4116:WP:CATDEF 3899:See also 3840:), 2013. 3543:WP:BURDEN 3428:WP:FRINGE 3340:talk page 3305:guideline 3048:Trovatore 3035:logicians 2978:Trovatore 2974:logicians 2959:logicians 2939:logicians 2883:Logicians 2877:Logicians 2837:Nil Einne 2429:Aristotle 2180:Trovatore 2012:Carl Jung 1981:WP:WAWARD 1838:talk page 1675:Hi Team, 1465:BabyJonas 1431:BabyJonas 1350:Chetvorno 1334:Chetvorno 1288:Chetvorno 1040:MartinZ02 1014:BabyJonas 1010:Certainty 958:BabyJonas 561:BabyJonas 496:scheduled 451:BabyJonas 404:BabyJonas 345:SPECIFICO 223:SPECIFICO 5537:Infinity 5488:userfied 5370:MusikBot 5344:Illusion 5137:MusikBot 5058:WP:TRUTH 4948:Headbomb 4945:Thanks. 4939:WP:PURGE 4899:J. phys. 4891:J. Phys. 4884:dotted, 4840:category 4688:Looie496 4648:Thanks!– 4371:Headbomb 4366:WP:PROMO 4275:Ajpolino 4253:Ajpolino 4234:Ajpolino 4070:— jmcgnh 4056:Analysis 4013:dchmelik 3946:dchmelik 3907:WP:FORUM 3879:dchmelik 3792:dchmelik 3790:those.-- 3695:dchmelik 3686:Republic 3630:see here 3577:dchmelik 3459:dchmelik 3420:WP:SYNTH 3303:WP:ANDOR 2970:logician 2955:logician 2935:logician 2924:— jmcgnh 2910:Logician 2685:ontology 2594:ontology 2551:Looie496 2509:contribs 2497:unsigned 2250:Skysmith 1846:Johnuniq 1562:Lettrism 1550:Lettrism 1373:over at 1368:Theology 1232:BlueMist 1168:goethean 617:Skyerise 511:MusikBot 374:Synthese 314:reverted 306:reverted 208:Ayn Rand 178:WP:NPOVN 164:TeeVeeed 121:TeeVeeed 5606:spirits 5270:Ipigott 5167:RolandR 5154:RfC at 4935:WP:NULL 4740:Gestcom 4724:Gestcom 4714:Gestcom 4677:Gestcom 4667:Gestcom 4404:Snowded 4342:SarahSV 4313:Synergy 4249:WP:PROD 2866:Become 2858:Dweller 2831:on the 2485:sandbox 2298:—jmcgnh 1973:WP:FOUR 1914:Bobo.03 1897:at the 1737:protect 1732:history 1567:Dadaism 1477:—jmcgnh 1344:PUSHing 1147:snunɐɯ· 1143:·maunus 1063:WP:GLBZ 182:WP:NPOV 39:archive 5580:bd2412 5556:videos 5552:carbon 5339:Hello, 5106:Hello, 4895:J Phys 4893:, not 4858:VERIFY 4810:WP:JCW 4709:Object 4565:Merge 4358:WP:JWG 4267:WP:AfD 4102:(talk) 4083:Jmcgnh 3416:WP:NOR 3229:Nature 2835:page. 2479:navbox 2374:) and 2371:Comedy 1741:delete 1575:Fluxus 1075:Meclee 579:Cnilep 546:Cnilep 480:Hello, 4832:ISO 4 4786:ISO 4 3424:WP:RS 3287:talk 3044:logic 2914:Logic 2885:from 2791:. -- 2789:WP:RS 2785:WP:RS 2767:says 2681:WP:RS 2677:WP:RS 2437:WP:RS 2365:Humor 2057:Paine 1758:views 1750:watch 1746:links 1649:This 1471:WP:RS 1285:. -- 1212:WP:RS 1197:Plato 1192:Plato 864:(see 845:Stalk 16:< 5618:talk 5608:are 5496:talk 5464:talk 5445:talk 5402:talk 5315:talk 5274:talk 5252:and 5171:talk 5111:Hero 5008:talk 4812:and 4752:talk 4718:talk 4692:talk 4671:talk 4654:talk 4622:talk 4614:here 4608:. A 4591:talk 4569:and 4556:talk 4532:talk 4502:talk 4494:here 4488:. A 4468:投稿記録 4456:here 4434:talk 4360:and 4338:here 4324:El_C 4303:talk 4279:talk 4271:here 4257:talk 4238:talk 4208:talk 4153:talk 4124:talk 4085:and 4054:and 3987:talk 3941:only 3923:talk 3917:. -- 3902:and 3864:talk 3858:. -- 3855:and 3749:talk 3743:. -- 3642:talk 3618:and 3551:talk 3515:talk 3436:talk 3430:. -- 3426:and 3401:swpb 3383:talk 3358:talk 3350:here 3327:talk 3319:here 3313:. A 3265:But 3231:nor 3185:talk 3150:talk 3111:talk 3103:here 3052:talk 3038:per 3025:talk 2996:this 2982:talk 2957:and 2943:word 2937:and 2899:talk 2891:this 2887:this 2862:talk 2841:talk 2797:talk 2769:here 2758:here 2711:talk 2693:talk 2648:talk 2625:talk 2579:talk 2555:talk 2533:talk 2505:talk 2501:KPU0 2467:talk 2461:Cake 2445:talk 2411:talk 2405:Cake 2386:talk 2368:(or 2343:talk 2277:talk 2254:talk 2231:talk 2203:talk 2184:talk 2176:best 2166:and 2002:talk 1918:talk 1877:talk 1850:talk 1808:ISBN 1754:logs 1728:talk 1724:edit 1703:talk 1685:talk 1659:talk 1653:for 1634:talk 1587:talk 1579:Punk 1577:and 1539:talk 1517:talk 1494:talk 1454:talk 1435:talk 1383:talk 1257:talk 1236:talk 1221:talk 1182:talk 1123:talk 1102:talk 1079:talk 1044:talk 1036:here 1033:life 1018:talk 992:talk 962:talk 947:talk 933:and 904:talk 870:diff 810:talk 787:talk 759:talk 744:talk 730:and 688:etc. 621:talk 613:here 583:talk 565:talk 550:talk 485:Debt 455:talk 440:talk 408:talk 378:Mind 376:and 351:talk 322:talk 310:here 302:here 292:talk 255:talk 243:this 229:talk 190:talk 168:talk 149:talk 141:less 125:talk 5529:Rod 5295:) ( 5083:ⱷ≼ 5079:≽ⱷ҅ 5060:or 5054:end 5028:FYI 4897:or 4480:RfC 4398:RFC 3849:." 3844:: " 3632:)) 3628:! ( 3282:DGG 3205:Bog 3170:Bog 3135:Bog 3091:Bog 2889:to 2380:. — 2048:at 2014:or 1946:'s 1938:At 1931:'s 1871:-- 1828:by 1405:Pam 1379:YBG 1277:, 1273:, 988:CN1 943:CN1 898:-- 5620:) 5558:) 5554:• 5498:) 5466:) 5447:) 5439:-- 5404:) 5366:— 5317:) 5276:) 5268:-- 5133:— 5066:— 5041:. 5031:– 5010:) 5002:. 4962:· 4958:· 4954:· 4929:}} 4923:{{ 4846:). 4828:}} 4822:{{ 4802:→ 4792:. 4782:}} 4776:{{ 4754:) 4720:) 4694:) 4673:) 4656:) 4624:) 4616:. 4593:) 4558:) 4534:) 4504:) 4496:. 4436:) 4385:· 4381:· 4377:· 4368:. 4340:. 4305:) 4281:) 4259:) 4240:) 4210:) 4155:) 4147:-- 4126:) 4023:) 3989:) 3956:) 3925:) 3889:) 3866:) 3802:) 3751:) 3705:) 3644:) 3587:) 3553:) 3538:, 3517:) 3469:) 3438:) 3422:, 3418:, 3385:) 3360:) 3352:. 3329:) 3321:. 3289:) 3187:) 3152:) 3113:) 3054:) 3027:) 2984:) 2920:? 2901:) 2864:) 2843:) 2799:) 2713:) 2695:) 2650:) 2627:) 2603:, 2600:, 2581:) 2557:) 2535:) 2511:) 2507:• 2469:) 2457:. 2447:) 2413:) 2388:) 2345:) 2317:. 2279:) 2256:) 2233:) 2205:) 2186:) 2133:— 2004:) 1979:/ 1975:/ 1971:/ 1967:/ 1920:) 1905:. 1879:) 1852:) 1756:| 1752:| 1748:| 1744:| 1739:| 1735:| 1730:| 1726:| 1705:) 1687:) 1661:) 1589:) 1541:) 1519:) 1496:) 1456:) 1437:) 1400:. 1385:) 1371:}} 1365:{{ 1347:-- 1308:. 1281:, 1259:) 1238:) 1223:) 1215:-- 1184:) 1145:· 1125:) 1104:) 1081:) 1046:) 1020:) 994:) 964:) 949:) 906:) 868:, 812:) 789:) 761:) 746:) 738:-- 623:) 615:. 585:) 567:) 552:) 507:— 457:) 442:) 410:) 324:) 294:) 286:-- 257:) 192:) 170:) 151:) 127:) 94:→ 64:← 5616:( 5587:T 5550:( 5494:( 5462:( 5443:( 5422:? 5400:( 5313:( 5287:? 5272:( 5260:) 5173:) 5169:( 5081:ᴥ 5077:¢ 5074:☏ 5071:☺ 5006:( 4966:} 4964:b 4960:p 4956:c 4952:t 4950:{ 4937:/ 4931:. 4876:. 4750:( 4716:( 4690:( 4669:( 4652:( 4620:( 4589:( 4573:? 4554:( 4530:( 4500:( 4432:( 4389:} 4387:b 4383:p 4379:c 4375:t 4373:{ 4301:( 4277:( 4255:( 4236:( 4206:( 4200:: 4196:@ 4151:( 4140:: 4136:@ 4122:( 4089:: 4081:@ 4021:c 4019:| 4017:t 4015:( 3985:( 3954:c 3952:| 3950:t 3948:( 3921:( 3913:/ 3887:c 3885:| 3883:t 3881:( 3862:( 3800:c 3798:| 3796:t 3794:( 3747:( 3703:c 3701:| 3699:t 3697:( 3640:( 3585:c 3583:| 3581:t 3579:( 3549:( 3513:( 3467:c 3465:| 3463:t 3461:( 3434:( 3381:( 3356:( 3325:( 3285:( 3201:. 3197:K 3183:( 3166:. 3162:K 3148:( 3131:. 3127:K 3109:( 3087:. 3083:K 3050:( 3023:( 3002:. 2980:( 2897:( 2860:( 2839:( 2795:( 2760:. 2709:( 2691:( 2673:: 2669:@ 2646:( 2623:( 2577:( 2553:( 2531:( 2503:( 2487:: 2465:( 2443:( 2425:: 2421:@ 2409:( 2384:( 2341:( 2275:( 2252:( 2229:( 2201:( 2182:( 2067:c 2064:/ 2000:( 1983:) 1969:C 1965:T 1963:( 1916:( 1875:( 1848:( 1815:. 1780:. 1760:) 1722:( 1701:( 1683:( 1636:) 1632:( 1624:— 1585:( 1537:( 1515:( 1492:( 1467:: 1463:@ 1452:( 1433:( 1414:D 1381:( 1255:( 1234:( 1219:( 1180:( 1121:( 1100:( 1077:( 1042:( 1016:( 990:( 960:( 945:( 902:( 842:/ 808:( 785:( 757:( 742:( 619:( 581:( 563:( 548:( 453:( 438:( 406:( 320:( 290:( 253:( 188:( 166:( 147:( 123:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.