Bob Ross

Hello Alkis Piskas, I think we may be reaching a semantic dead-end here, but let me try to adequately respond. I am using the term “proposition” in th...

Philosophically, a proposition is a statement that is truth-apt and not merely something “suggested to be considered, accepted, or done”. Not at all. ...

Sorry, I must have misunderstood what you were originally trying to convey; as I thought you were contesting my OP with the use of categorical norms. ...

Hello Alkis Piskas, Interesting point! Yes, you are correct that my OP presupposes that facts can be of the ‘moral’ type. I would say that a ‘fact’ is...

Hello Mww, They are; and I apologize if I suggested otherwise. I think the crux of this definition rests on “worthiness of being happy”: how does one ...

Hello Tom Storm, One does not, under any theory of truth, establish truth of the theory of truth without any circular logic. I only claim that the evi...

I take a correspondence theory of truth, so I would say that truth is a relationship between subject (viz., mind-dependence) and object (viz., mind-in...

I see, and what do you mean by a "moral" obligation, as opposed to a mere obligation? I would say the contrary, that moral obligations are rooted in t...

Do you believe, then, that obligations do not begin with a desire? My point is that even if there are categorical imperatives, we only are obliged to ...

Hello Plaque Flag, In order to further the conversation, I would appreciate it if you could define (generally) what you mean by "rationality"; because...

Hello Ciceronianus, In the sense that I cannot say they are objectively wrong for what they want, or even if I can appeal to a moral fact it would be ...

Hello Schopenhauer1, I guess I am just not following how this ties to the OP, as I would say that the meaning that actually matters is one’s fundament...

Hello Plaque Flag, You didn’t provide a definition of “rationality” here. The paragraph you shared uses the term without defining it. So let me ask ag...

Hello Frank, This is also a good point, but not the point I am trying to make. Instead of questioning how reliably a person could obtain knowledge of ...

Hello Frank, I am more than happy to discuss Christianity if you find it relevant to the OP: can you tie it back to the OP so I understand where we ar...

Hello Plaque Flag, I have not been able to penetrate into what you mean by “rationality”, as it seems to be some sort of logos, so please give me clea...

Hello Janus, Where I am confused then, is why you said: Saying “there do seem to be laws of nature”, by my lights, is admitting that you believe in la...

Hello Plaque flag, Then what do you mean? Can you please define “rationality” for me (in the sense that you are using it)? For me, I was referring to ...

Hello Frank, This is a pretty fair summary. I would add that each person is actually determining the norm insofar as they are implicitly agreeing to i...

I partially disagree: most people have false beliefs about their own tastes, so moral discourse is helpful for really honing in on what one truly want...

So, then, would it be ethical for me to murder someone if I abided by the most rational course of action to achieve it? It seems to me that being rati...

Hello Janus, Do you agree that your commitment to the laws of nature is faith-based and not a publicly observed piece of data? Observed regularities n...

Honestly, I just didn't know, way back when, what to use as my handle; so I just went with Bob Ross (after the painter you mentioned before). Of cours...

I can assure you that they are not referring to me, although that would be cool (;

Hello Darkneos, Let’s take an example (of what I believe you are referring to here): there’s a red block on the table in front of me and I say “there’...

Hello Plaque Flag, So, under your view, the brain is not representing anything? ‘Seeing’ and ‘smelling’, by my lights, are senses: are you saying we h...

You can only ever use reason: you have no choice. How else would you suggest that you can prove something or warrant a belief? It is true that reasoni...

But it isn't: you can't account, by my lights, for the fact that our brains are representing the world to us. For example, how do you account for the ...

Hello Janus, You said: Either you (1) believe there are laws (which are inductively affirmed by science) and philosophical principles (which are presu...

Hello Plaque Flag, I don’t follow what you mean. If you are talking about my body, then I would say that my body within my conscious experience is a r...

Please demonstrate to me how you are able to empirically verify that every change has a cause. Also, logic is never empirically verified definitively....

I didn’t follow this sentence: could you please restate it? First what? Prima facie, it doesn’t. However, upon investigation, there are strong inducti...

We could be 'hypergoo', but that is an incredibly unparsimonious account of reality (and, not to mention, completely unwarranted). Moreover, even if t...

Hello Plaque Flag, Oh I see: are you arguing that the only thing one can directly know is the result of their brain’s processes (and thusly are immers...

Hello Plaque Flag, But the brain-for-us is not the brain-in-itself, exactly because it is a representation of it.

It is just as much of a 'faith-based' reasoning as PSR or that there laws (as opposed to mere observed regularities): do you reject those as "unprovab...

Hello Janus, Since we have already discussed this, I will be brief here: I disagree that we cannot come to know things at all in-themselves. It does n...

I am not a substance dualist.

Hello ItIsWhatItIs, I think most theists accept the possibility of nothingness (viz., that there is nothing incoherent nor logically inconsistent with...

Hello Plaque Flag, As an indirect realist myself (of an idealist flavor), I agree; but this exactly my point! The brain-in-itself is represented as th...

Hello Mww, Then wouldn’t it be impossible to know that one has a representative faculty, let alone that one is? This is fair to an extent; however, we...

Hello ItIsWhatItIs, Let me just ask you: do you think there could have been nothing instead of the universe (or reality) in which we live? Based off o...

The resolution to this "hidden dualism" is to recognize that the brain and its functions are also representations and, thusly, the brain-in-itself is ...

Hello Philosophim, There distinguishable properties are what separate them; and depending one’s metaphysical theory they may be completely quantitativ...

Hello ItIsWhatItIs, Firstly, there are quite a lot of people that consider nothingness (which is merely the pure negation of things, including “not ap...

Hello Plaque Flag, Yeah, his terminology isn’t the most intuitive, to say the least; so I try not to import it into my statements unless absolutely ne...

Hello ItIsWhatItIs, I would say that being is not a proper predicate and is not a valid property because it is presupposed in each predicate and each ...

Hello Plaque Flag, I agree. I was going to quote Heidegger's Being & Time where he talks about the act of uncovering, but I couldn't find the quote in...

Hello Banno, I am not a dualist: juxtaposing two things does not entail, in-itself, ontological dualism; which is the only type of dualism subject to ...

Hello Javi, No worries my friend! I may also just be my slow mind understanding what you are saying. This is where I am confused: To me, these two cla...