Ray Kurzwiel

[goddamniamsoawesome]

Re: Ray Kurzwiel

@psyah

Peace

I don’t know of the guy … but being able to make assertions of future possibilities based on current trends makes him an analyst not a philosopher …

What I would like to hear from him is what he feels “should” be happening and whether he feels where humanity is taking itself is the “right” thing or not …

@psyah

Peace Pepsi ki Botal

I could be wrong no doubt … so you say that modern philosophy is different from classic philosophy (I agree), but you say that the difference is that modern philosophy is about “what the future will be based on” … Please explain this to me … and perhaps a few examples … we are all here to learn aren’t we? Also, perhaps use Ray Kurzwiel in your example.

Also, please explain what you mean by “posing their biased opinions as philosophical works” … presumably you are saying “philosophical works should NOT be biased - which means they are objective and not subjective” or if you are not then please explain how you may feel something that cannot be proven is unbiased valid philosophy according to your definition.

Another side question - do you feel that modern minds are better qualified to determine what is correct and hence when someone like Nietzsche writes his words are better or more useful than the words of say Socrates … ? I guess each of these can be threads all in their own right … but entertain me please.

Y U SO MAD BRO?

Ray Kurzweil does not call himself a philosopher. Neither did anyone in this thread.
His work however is pretty philosophical.
His commentary on man and machine and how trends will shape our lives are as philosophical as you’ll get.

Eitherway if you haven’t read of his work then I don’t believe you have any basis for your objections.

P.S. I bet 10 quid.