Bob Ross

If by causality, you really mean temporal causality; then that needs to be clarified in the OP. Your OP clearly, taken literally, is discussing an inf...

Unfortunately, I was unable to parse exactly what you are trying to argue. In set theory, it is vacuously true that the null set is a proper subset of...

When you posit that C is the set containing all causes (i.e., contingent events) and that the universe has a cause (i.e., is a contingent event), then...

If the series itself is not a first cause and there is no cause for the series; then there is no first cause. OR The series itself has no cause, and t...

Interesting. I think the Stoic approach to death is the only healthy approach towards it. Anything else is an exemplification of a personal attachment...

Stoicism is about equanimity not indifference.

:fire: -- "the longest-lived and those who will die soonest lose the same thing. The present is all they can give up, since that is all you have, and ...

Stoicism is about acquiring and maintaining equanimity, and is a very practical philosophy. It instructs one to focus on what is within one's control ...

And here is culprit of why your OP doesn't prove that there must be a first cause: That the infinite series of causality just is, doesn't make it a ca...

You conflated them again. “existences” here refers to beings, and ‘existence’ refers to Being. The first sentence I have no quarrel with; but the seco...

This doesn't resolve the ambiguity but, rather, re-enforces it: when you use the term 'cause' in the infinite chain, it does not refer whatsoever to t...

In summary: Number 6 in the OP is false, and springs from a conflation of an originally valid conception of causality into a conception of explanation...

My hypothesis would be that your mind is uneasy about but also somewhat satisfied with identifying goodness with happiness because you recognize that ...

In a traditional sense: Libertarians believe in leeway freedom, compatibilists in sourcehood freedom. The former believes agents are sources of indete...

I don't think it is clear enough in the OP that you are making an argument, not about the truth of the matter, but the weighing of costs of believing ...

I think our dispute here requires me to get a bit more specific (to convey it better). It is critical to distinguish ‘Being’ from ‘beings’—which, if y...

Different existence isn’t more existence. Being is just what is in the sense of the whole; and the whole is not increasing when you combine two hydrog...

I agree. In order to avoid this, I think the OP needs to clarify that it is arguing for it being true that one should believe in leeway free will even...

Oh, I see now. Let me clarify. What one is predetermined to do may be irrational, but one is not irrational for simply doing what one is predetermined...

I stand by that quote of me, and I am unsure as to what you are arguing about it.

The crux of your argument is: I am just pointing out that this was not defended whatsoever in your OP; and, without any further elaboration, it is a n...

Not quite. I am a compatibilist: I was noting the differences between incompatibilism, libertarianism, and compatibilism. I never claimed it was irrat...

:sad: Vaskane, it does not help further the discussion by insulting people whom you disagree with; and it certainly does not help to straw man their p...

There is no doubt that beings with no free will can construct a society which is predicated off of having accountability for one's actions: what makes...

???

A choice is merely to decide for or against something, and this process absolutely can happen by something which is deterministic. Even if I am comple...

That we do act as though responsibility exists, does not make it true that people have responsibilities. If one really thinks that free will does not ...

I find this peculiar and a bit confusing. The same amount of existence is there irregardless; so how is it really ever more, other than by the waive o...

If one is a compatibilist, then they would respond with (something along the lines of) “because causal determinism is true, one cannot do otherwise bu...

Firstly, A-D are all presupposing certain axiological claims that I would completely reject. For example, A and B are false. What matters is relative ...

Here's a good question: how does your theory handle suffering? By my lights, suffering is not a relevant factor at all to the complication (or increas...

Hello Philosophim, I am still finding it unclear what principle you are using to decipher when to to use what UOM, but, if I may, I think I can serve ...

Sorry for the late response! I think it may be beneficial for us to distinguish the unit of measure from the unit being measured. A ‘liter’, ‘gram’, e...

I agree that morality has a prescriptive element to it; but 'what is good' is not prescriptive at all. I very much subscribe to the ontological is-oug...

:confused:

How natural systems are has nothing to do with how they should be, in the sense that how it is does not directly inform us of how it ought to be. So I...

Firstly, let’s take it one step at a time: do you agree or disagree with my response to your use of the term ‘harmony’? It is impossible for us to mak...

I mean the peaceful congruence of all parts of a thing, when I say a thing is in 100% self-harmony. This is not equivocal to being the synthesis of tw...

Which is not the same thing as finding the synthesis between complete disarray and order. The latter is one particular instance of the former, and you...

Here you go again not engaging in the conversation... :roll: I am using the definitions that make the most historical sense when the historical notion...

If me demonstrating how your examples are subsumable under my position is 'ad hoc'ing it' ('ex post facto'ing it') and 'thusly' invalid, then, Pantagr...

I see. Hopefully I can clarify my position as we converse. My response to this still is: If by this you are just talking about your belief that the te...

Oh, I see. Properties can have degrees; e.g., something can have the property of 'being functional' without being 100% functional. Something can have ...

Literally every major use of the term “good” (or an equivalent in a different language) has been used, at its core, in one of the two senses. That is ...

What exactly are you questioning the facticity of (in my view)? I never claimed that it is a fact that a 100% morally perfect entity exists. This was ...

Vaskane, insults do not help further the discussion: I am not interested in disrespectful, unproductive, and ingenuine comments. You still have of yet...

It was one example that illustrated the point: you are splitting hairs here. I am not interested in derailing the conversation into politics. It has a...

That's going to depend on politics, especially how good/bad one thinks the US is. I am a supporter of the US (by-at-large) and I am not convinced that...

I don’t know what you mean by this, so I am going to default to answering “no”. I was saying that rationality has pragmatic worth/value for moral prog...

Firstly, the examples I gave are examples of actual perfection; but they do not exemplify necessarily anything in the actual world. Secondly, you are ...