Baden

Thick coat of irony there, alright.

Removed @"pbxman"'s membership at his/her request.

You can't. We own you now. I mean, OK then, I'll remove your membership. Have a nice day.

We're all in the pay of the Bush family and would rather you didn't blow our cover.

Nice OP with many interesting issues raised :up: Just to make the observation that the ultimate point of the social credit system in my view is not to...

Haven't done a scientific study on it, but my impression is it has, as expected, helped with quality (with all due respect to @"ArguingWAristotleTiff"...

Ah, you've moved to Canada already!?

Well, stick it here I suppose and I'll transfer it over there. I closed it as I thought the issue had run its course, but the last few comments seemed...

@"S" @"praxis" Put your comments in the closed pinning discussion.

That's about as good as it gets. The rest is just TV.

/uploads/files/9o/69lvlkjtxgp4n3ja.jpg

So, seeing as you didn't tag me, I can plausibly deny seeing this and correcting the record. Carry on. :up:

Take it up with Harry then. And I hope you'll be able to sleep at night after that.

You're catching on K. :razz:

Shall we do a poll? Probably. It's sometimes necessary, but certainly not in most of what goes on around here.

:lol:

And I don't care that you got it wrong. It doesn't matter. Again>>The point.

We are talking about logic and logical fallacies in a philosophical context and the appropriate vocabulary to be used within that context. I didn't in...

Arguments can't be true. So, he messed up the vocab. As are you... "If you talk of 'valid premises' or 'true arguments', then you are not using logica...

Yes, we should really change your name to @"K", and this place to "The Philosophy Castle".

At last, consensus. Just need @"Michael"'s go ahead then. Oh...

Cool. I'll try not to spoil the suspense by telling you jamalrob said no. :up:

Ok, I'll just wait 'til you work your way through every reply then... :ok:

If no-one reads in the Resources section, I guess they won't notice the waste of space either. :nerd:

What about @"fdrake"'s idea? My suggestion would be to combine the two. Pin a list of resources / fallacies in the Resources section and link from the...

We've got the resources section of the Learner centre. We could pin there maybe.

Yes. He just managed to be wrong again with this.

Thanks for that. Feel like consensus on this may not materialize though...

Of course you don't. https://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Philosophy/Logic/Truth_and_Validity "An argument is valid if the conclusion follo...

@"Harry Hindu" posted the same. Are you both on commission for fallacy posters? :wink: Basic idea is OK by me if that's what people want. But no pages...

We're not going to overwhelm the guidelines with a list of fallacies and their explanations, but we could possibly put a link to a list of fallacies i...

:lol: :up:

You are hopelessly befuddled*. Morality is not reducible to biology any more than concepts like 'marriage', 'money' etc, or more to the point, "beauty...

I'll try a poem next time. Anything to alleviate the boredom of watching a bunch of folks make desperate efforts to not think in a remotely interestin...

Cheers, I thought we might have some visual learners among the critics here, but...

And in your conception, is a brain state a subject or an object?

What you should be more worried about is a decreasing population and a demographic shift to the aged. Already happening. (And not just in the US but a...

So, the brain state is morality but there is no moral / immoral to brain states? Where can you find the moral / immoral then? Just trying to clarify h...

Ok, and the 'that' in 'that's morality' for me would consist in interactions / behaviours. In other words, if an alien came to earth and asked me what...

@"Terrapin Station" Ok, so what you're looking for is the 'that' in 'that's morality', right? And for you, it's what? A brain state? Can you be very s...

I've had over a dozen replies in an hour and I'm eating lunch. But believe me, I always follow through. :halo:

Note though that others, while they might not agree, are actually engaging. I hate to say it, but I think you're being a tad... unreasonable. :wink:

We're off-topic now. I'll get round to elaborating with individuals when and if I think it will be useful. But my effort here is just to support my co...

I'm not asking you to care. I suppose you replied to my post by accident. Keep your fingers under better control next time.

Of course not, because they would have already been constituted socially before you removed the others. Isn't that obvious? But if you took a human ne...

You're both talking past me. Have a look at the schema and go from there. Where is the error? Let me put it this way, I'm claiming there are only soci...

I think it boils down more to finding a better way to talk about morality than fundamental disagreements about what it is.

Not trying to speak for @"Banno", but absolutely agree with him it fails. If the moral subject is both constituted of/by social relations and embedded...

Yes. My view is something like the first schema. I see @"Terrapin Station"'s as something like the second. I don't think his works. /uploads/resized/f...

/uploads/resized/files/ld/6x4dt03m9ob0dsno.png