What puzzles me is this. If gender-identity issues, with ambiguous genders, and this seems more plausible than not, in the population existed througho...
I don't get it at all but that probably says more about my ignorance anything else. My reasoning is simple: 1. Before we can consider whether a person...
Oh. I get what you mean. However, deontic logic supervenes, if not in entirety at least in the part that's got to do with relationship between possibi...
Well, look up modal logic in SEP and read the section explaining the diamond and box operators. Box = Necessary and Diamond = Possible You're all over...
:up: Remember about how I said Kant views immorality as irrationality. There's another side to the story though. For certain you must've heard someone...
Morality is our understanding of good and bad. Goodness is just one side of this coin (of morality). Understanding morality, in our case, doesn't alwa...
Given that morality has been key to the apparently fragile peace among people, tribes, cultures, nations and other social entities, it's the low-hangi...
What do you mean by "raw capacity". You speak as if freedom has a meaning other than being able to do whatever we want. Pray tell, what is this other ...
IPlease visit Stanford Encyclopedia Of Philosophy. Also why would it be "weird"? Really why? What makes it weird? I get that the diamond operator is r...
??? :chin: You're talking about deontic logic but it's an offshoot of modal logic, the latter subsuming the former as it were. Ergo, if something goes...
You seem to have missed my point. Nothing is not anything. If so, any question I pose of the form below: 1. Is nothing x? must be answered with "not" ...
Two words, one person, "Immanuel Kant". I was on another thread titled 'Freedom And Duty" started by @"tim wood" on Kantian ethics. What a lucky coinc...
Why can't you just say that freedom - being able to do whatever we want - is either an impediment or an obstruction for the good, that duty - being un...
The religious This is the meat of the issue. Secularism tolerates and makes room for religion which it regards as just another one of the many differe...
Was it Shakespeare or one of the characters in his many plays that said and I quote, ? That quote endorses the view that beauty is subjective. Such a ...
My only objection is regarding the title itself, Freedom AND Duty for it's a contradiction. Freedom means we're is at liberty to do whatever we want b...
I think I get it now. There's nothing and the concept of nothing. That nothing can't be a concept and it can't be according to its definition doesn't ...
Physics envy? What's that but a general sense of dissatisfaction with how the soft sciences lack the mathematical precision of physics and even chemis...
Yes, I was having trouble with that particular aspect of the problem - word and their referents. You mean to say that the word "nothing" refers to not...
What I suppose is going on is that religious folks draw part of their identity from religion whichever among the many thousands that may be. Religion ...
My concern, as my post shows, is whether there's a necessary link between wisdom and morality. Let's begin our investigation, if you could call it tha...
The real is that which has its own independent existence and by independent existence I mean not, in any way, a construct of the mind. So, by this def...
The OP is quite clear on where he wants to take this discussion. The goal is to put rationality itself on trial and the expected/desired verdict is th...
But if our domain of discourse is pigs, it doesn't make sense to talk of sonar. Pigs, unlike bats, dolphins, whales and some birds, don't possess that...
Why is the question illogical/wrong? Let me rephrase the question using some examples: 1. x + 3 > 5. What is the solution set for the inequality 1? {3...
Domain of discourse. Why not? Something is at least ONE. So, the possibility of 1 thing or the possibility of 2 things...or the possibility of n thing...
There a whole bunch of scientists who have a dim view of philosophy which I suppose they regard as nothing more than wool-gathering. I can't name them...
Perhaps you'll detect a slight change in my position but it's a work in progress. So, view this is an improvement on my earlier conception of wisdom a...
Something is at least ONE. Mathematically Something >= 1. If that's true not something < 1 and that's ZERO and ZERO's nothing. It appears that somethi...
All I can say is that the following things you said form are at odds with each other: 1. "everything has to have a cause to exist" and 2. "it has to d...
For another thing, chess pieces are named after things that we encounter in life: King, Queen, Bishops, Rooks, Knights and pawns are treated as foot s...
I recall you making this assertion before and I'm interested in putting it under the philosophical microscope for closer examination. Are you saying p...
The word on that is science straying into philosophy is that it's reciprocal - philosophy too has strayed into science - and what I expect to emerge o...
The probabilistic answer to the fundamental question of metaphysics I provided doesn't have as its conclusion that "something exists". As you rightly ...
Comments