neomac

Indeed there is lots I could learn from your intellectual dishonesty. But no, sorry, not interested. Let me stress it once more (from the abyss of my ...

Sure ma’am. First let me stress my initial claim: What you have just now provided is a list of 4 deductions that do not correspond at all to the forma...

Yep, what's next?

go on.

can you formalise your argument or not, logic pimp?

Indeed I have literally no clue what "deductively valid" means to you. But in logic, "deductively valid" has a very specific meaning, not whatever stu...

@"SwampMan" Your counterargument looks more as a strawman wrt the DCT argument you have proposed: It’s not evident that that DCT argument is committed...

Seriously?! Pls, formalise your argument as it is so we can laugh harder at your stupid claim.

It's the most stupid claim I've read so far in this thread to consider this argument (as it is) deductively valid.

I disagree with that (but maybe you are simply confusing the truth claim intrinsic to any belief with the logic implication between belief and the tru...

"now" doesn't identify a moment relative to a temporal series. Indeed you do not need to know the timestamp of the current moment, to know that is now...

> Belief does not imply truth One obvious consequence of a belief being a relation between an individual and a proposition is that the truth of the pr...

> Is it possible for broken clocks to work? No. And you know why? It’s because “broken” and “to work” are contradictory properties. On the other side ...

> What would it have taken in order for Jack's belief that that particular clock was working to have been true at time t1? If that particular clock at...

> A belief is a propositional attitude.That is, it can be placed in a general form as a relation between someone and a proposition. > Any belief, incl...

@"creativesoul" > Do you agree that it is impossible to knowingly believe a falsehood? Where do you stand on that? I take to be impossible that a rati...

> Do you agree that it is humanly impossible to knowingly believe a falsehood? It’s logically impossible if knowledge presupposes true belief. > It wa...

> You've admittedly attributed a belief to Jack that is true What’s stopping you from realizing that you've misattributed belief to Jack as a result o...

> You've ascribed a belief to Jack that is true. I have not. Jack's belief is false. Correct but I don’t get what is supposed to prove, since it’s not...

> No. Believing is not equivalent to belief. The former is an activity. Whereas at the core, the latter are compositions of correlations in varying co...

> That's a very odd phrasing at the end. There were others earlier, but they all seem inconsequential. I think you meant to write "Until I do..." rath...

Quoting myself: OK let me help you with your case. Indeed, I think there might be a way out for you but only if you reject this line of reasoning: “Ca...

> Well, if you do not wish to continue, there's not much more I can do. I am very short on time for doing this stuff, for having this discussion, but ...

> I am talking about a belief that they are unaware of having at time t1. Thus, my proposal ought not match their point of view at time t1. First of a...

> In your rendering of my contentions here, you've placed far too much importance on the notions of intentional, intensional, and extensional.. Indeed...

@"creativesoul" Let me reformulate your proposal without mentioning all wrong hints I think you provided (and still provide) and in terms that I find ...

Accuracy with respect to what? All I can say is that the most accurate report of someone’s belief at time t1 is the one that best matches the point of...

> "Something" that is shared by different sentences is too vague. If not, then how can we say that different sentences share things? Right. But I left...

> What do you mean by "propositional content"? What are you pointing at when you use the string of scribbles, "propositional content”? I take it to me...

Fine with me, I don’t want to waste your time and energies. And you already have many other interlocutors. In any case, I'm more playful than you migh...

Agreed, indeed I was backing up the part where you wrote “meaning that words (as an image of strings of scribbles)” Maybe regardless of any specific c...

Of course, but if you follow my exchange with Creative Soul with due attention, you should understand why I made it up. That crazy sentence is the res...

> Rather than propose something I've not, Oh really? This is what you wrote: “Can Jack look at a broken clock? Surely. Can Jack believe what the clock...

I don't see them as presupposing a specific account of belief as such, in their treatment of JTB. They are reasoning about the idea that JTB (formulat...

Agreed? In what sense? Where? Can you quote where I agree with you? I also said, let's pretend etc. And this is just one part of the reasoning, where ...

@"Harry Hindu" > If you are agreeing with me that strings of scribbles is an image then there could be many descriptions that could correspond to the ...

Not sure about it, also because knowledge is a wider issue. What I can say now is that, concerning belief ascription practices, I'm strongly against a...

As I said, this is the kind of de re belief ascription that we can use when we are not sure about a de dicto belief ascription (i.e. we don’t know wha...

All right sir, let’s talk about what I did and why I did it. First of all, I already made my objections to your theoretical assumptions wrt a more com...

What do you mean? I just quoted verbatim the shit you wrote. Did you change it again?

mmmkey And what does "My claim was that JTB was the basis of the rendering" is supposed to mean?

All right, as I wrote in the P.S. you re-edited the text, after I picked it up. I realised it too late. Apologies, sir. Let me repay you by denouncing...

You claimed that JTB was the basis of belief as propositional attitude. I took you to mean either that the notion of belief as propositional attitude ...

@"creativesoul" > However, after becoming aware of our error, there's nothing at all stopping us from admitting that it was raining outside and we did...

@"Harry Hindu" > Here we are talking past each other again. In 1 and 2 you are talking about the some string of scribbles (descriptive sentences that ...

@"Harry Hindu" > In what way are images suppose to be ambiguous? The only images and words that are suppose to be ambiguous is art. My point was that ...

@"creativesoul" > There is a common practice of personifying animals. If we follow your advice here, anthropomorphism is acceptable. Not necessarily. ...

I lost you again. It doesn’t really matter how you phrase it based on your questionable philosophical assumptions. All I meant was simply that you as ...

As far as I can tell, Frege published "Sense and reference" in 1892, while Gettier published his "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?" in 1963, beside...

I lost you. I’m talking about your theoretical understanding of the belief ascription practice wrt to the notion of “belief”. A theory of belief shoul...