Thread replies: 12
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 2-human-interact.jpg (40KB, 500x300px) Image search:
[Google]
40KB, 500x300px
His how do I research the problem of intentionality?
For example If there is a guy and a girl that like each other but dont know the other one likes them back.
If one tries to maka advances they are risking getting hurt by a rejection but If they both telegraphed it because they were forced to then the problem would be solved.
Lets say they both had a gun pointed to their heads to be triggered if they did not convey their feelings towards one another, i.e. they were forced and it was not a matter of their choice.
This creates a win win situation where both parties know the intentions of the other but none has a reason to be hurt.
This is obviously an extreme example but there are many other examples which are similair but realistic.
I dont fully understand the mechanics of why the first normal situation creates a problem with possibly negative consequences and i dont fully understand why the later solution actually solves the problem.
>>
Nothing?
>>
Please help?
>>
In all honesty OP is somewhat nonsensical
>>
>>
>>584373
Is there anything worse then posters like yourself?
You do know that counts as shitposting dont you?
>>
>>584365
why? Im just trying to understand how the problem is created.
>>
>>584405
Supplying 4 references on the problem counts as shitposting.
Do you change yourself these days?
>>
>>584411
>yeah go read a few books that might not even address the actual issue since i said nothing to indicate my thoughts on the subject
The point is to discuss things or at lesast give certain answers which can be properly explained or elaborated upon in X book.
Your post was simply useless except making you feel better about yourself for name dropping.
>>
>>584432
I'm sorry OP, but you need to fucking read things.
Also you're an incoherent shithead who has no idea of how the problem is specified in philosophy.
Go read L'etranger.
>>
>>584439
How about you specify it correctly? I wonder why you havent. Maybe cause you have no actuakl idea what you yourself mean?
>>
>>584448
Go read deBeauvoir on intimacy.
Thread posts: 12
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1