Moral nihilism (i.e., error theory) in metaethics is the view that: 1. Moral judgments are propositional; and 2. They are all false. So, moral nihilis...
I can't remember Nietzsche ever considering, in his works, the value of moral facts themselves; but only that they don't exist. The idea of "morality ...
I do think Nietzsche got a lot of it right on morality, but I would say that I am taking it a step deeper than him; as he was a moral anti-realist thr...
No, I was meaning to describe the benefits of moral realism if it were true; but I think most of my OP is actually still quite accurate: the only diff...
Imagine that there was a law ingrained into reality that governed objects (to some extent) where it was defined what is better/best: wouldn't aligning...
Well, then, it appears as though Kant has no grounds to be an indirect realist. Why think there are real objects, then? There should be. Kant gives a ...
I just disagree that Kant was meaning 'thing-in-itself' in that manner: he states very clearly throughout CPR that we will never know anything about t...
Everyone, Although there are still parts of my OP that I still consider true, I think that I have an answer (to myself) of the benefit, if true, of mo...
I agree. But this just demonstrates that there is no such transcendentally (valid) argument for there actually being real objects beyond our intuition...
Hello Javi, I accept the existence of things-in-themselves. I don’t think so: it would be more in the realm of metaphysics and ontology. I was not, in...
Despite your insinuations and imputations about my intentions, I, upon further reflection, think that your "two worlds" argument is a good point; and ...
But the “real objects” which excite your sensibility could be fabrication by a higher power, could they not? Likewise, it could be the case that, if r...
Upon further reflection, I completely agree (with everything you said): the noumena would be perfectly unintelligible, which undermines our reasons to...
I guess it depends on what you mean by "exist outside of the mind". For kant, space is a mode of intuition, so all he was saying (as far as I can tell...
Both are fine by me! Something must produce experience because the content of experience is within space and/or time, which are but forms of experienc...
The only one I remember off the top of my head is his "refutation of idealism" which only proves that there must be real things outside of me in space...
@"Janus" I think @"Banno" is confusing the ontological with the epistemic consideration of the cup (in their hypothetical situation they posited): jus...
It is talk of the same ontological thing. I am not saying there are ontologically two worlds: I am saying epistemically there must be two, ontological...
Perhaps I misunderstood you: I was under the impression that you were just noting that things-in-themselves, if this theory is correct, are completely...
Hello Corvus, I don’t think it does. I can know X is not Y without knowing anything about the properties of Y. I know that the limits of my knowledge ...
Hello Corvus, I am just saying that using “you = Bob Ross” is ambiguous. Is bob ross my reprsentative faculties? Whatever exists in-itself that that f...
I do, in terms of what has been used historically by-at-large, think that python is relatively new to the web development game; but I stand corrected ...
Hello Gregory, I appreciate your response! Fair enough. Our understanding of the world is constrained to language (or at least initially). I do, howev...
All you have said (that I can remember) is: 1. New scientific discoveries nullify transcendental idealism; 2. It is awkward to speak about things-in-t...
Although I am not convinced by that kind of argument (which I have spoken to 180 proof about), you are confusing ontological with epistemic idealism. ...
Not necessarily. All bodies are representations that I experience (including my own), but what they be in-themselves is cut off from me. This is not t...
I don’t think you have said much in terms of your contentions yet. Interesting: could you please elaborate? Is this the “problem of one or two worlds”...
How? Nothing I argued entails ontological solipsism. Perhaps epistemic, but not ontological. And, paradigmatically, I am perfectly fine saying other p...
Hello Jamal, Fair enough. From my experience, I have seen python being used as a server-side language only relatively recently (but perhaps I just hav...
Hello Banno, Banno, I am not interested in throwing insults back and forth at one another. I am not interested in any badges, prestige, nor pretentiou...
Hello Corvus, Correct. The thing-in-itself is necessary not the thing (the sensations): the former is whatever exists for and in itself, not whatever ...
Hello Corvus, Me as a representative faculty would, but me as a self-reflective cognition (i.e., reason) or psychological tip of the iceberg (‘ego’) w...
Firstly, there is no "the best" framework or languages for programming: it depends entirely on what the project is that one is developing. Personally,...
Hello RussellA, Yes, Kant would be an indirect realist. Not in the contemporary sense of the term: I did not deploy the scientific method to determine...
Hello Corvus, I was just paraphrasing what Mww said (which I linked in the previous response): it could be the case that my sensibility is 100% accura...
Hello 180 Proof, Agreed, but necessary explication if I am to deduce anything transcendentally without blindly trusting the content of experience. Bec...
Hello Banno, Not really. It follows from us having sensibility. I honestly think, although it is all conjecture, he wouldn’t have changed anything if ...
Hello Banno, By @"Ciceronianus" own admission, it is not a contention with transcendental idealism; as it is a necessary and perfectly anticipated con...
Fair enough! I was just trying to understand your position, as I still don't know what you are exactly saying; but if you would like to agree to disag...
1. There is experience, therefore something exists. 2. That something, or a part of it, must be producing experience. 3. The unified parts of that som...
Hello Mww, I am hesitant to agree here: wouldn’t it be more that the understanding/judgment facutly(ies) are preconditioned to try to represent things...
Hello Mww, This is a really good point I, admittedly, missed. @"Corvus" I change my mind: I don’t have negative knowledge of the things-in-themselves ...
Hello Corvus, That’s fine by me. I just don’t think the colloquial expression “I know nothing of X” is contradicted here, since it precludes negative ...
Comments