You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

S

Comments

Mahna mahna Do do, dododo Mahna mahna Do do, do do Mahna mahna Do do, dododo dododo dododo dododododo do do dodo do No, and see my argument. (By the w...
February 22, 2019 at 07:26
Some people have actually inadvertently contributed to their own death by believing what's reasonable at the time. But there's a very important sense ...
February 21, 2019 at 21:25
Oh look, another misrepresentation. I claim no such thing. I claim that an hour would pass, not your nonsense-claim that a measurement of time would p...
February 21, 2019 at 20:21
I identified that problem long ago. To put it bluntly, whether it's truth or knowledge we're talking about, his criteria is fucked up, and he repeated...
February 21, 2019 at 20:01
I'm going to ignore you now.
February 21, 2019 at 19:50
Sorry, but I'm not going to open wide for a spoonful of bollocks. That's not how I operate.
February 21, 2019 at 19:47
I'm not saying, arguing, or suggesting in any way whatsoever that the future will necessarily resemble the past. If you think that, then... drum roll....
February 21, 2019 at 19:43
That's okay, it's not a problem for me anyway. We're talking about a truth that is unconfirmed by your standards, not necessarily an unknown truth. An...
February 21, 2019 at 18:30
If it seems to you like I'm not grasping that, then you're completely misunderstanding. (Big surprise). You're preaching to the choir there. If this w...
February 21, 2019 at 12:57
So you agree that it's reasonable to believe that there would be a rock, but you don't agree that we know this? If so, I think this is because you set...
February 21, 2019 at 12:21
:smile:
February 21, 2019 at 06:47
It seems a bunch of us are in agreement that what Banno was saying there seems to amount to a triviality.
February 20, 2019 at 11:30
Seems so to me as well. I'd make what could potentially be more or less the same point, only worded differently. Perhaps a related point. The one infl...
February 20, 2019 at 11:17
I don't not kick the puppy by mere accident. That's pretty darn absurd. I don't kick it because, in your lingo, I have a private rule. Why would you c...
February 20, 2019 at 11:03
That seems false or arbitrary. I don't get why it wouldn't count. Just because you don't want it to? That seems relatively insignificant if it's actua...
February 20, 2019 at 10:58
So, with 11 votes, realism has the lead in the poll for both Part 1 & Part 2, although it is tied with idealism in Part 2. So, realism is doing relati...
February 20, 2019 at 10:48
Everyone who thinks that there wouldn't be a rock an hour after we died, or who doesn't think that there would be, or who thinks that we don't know en...
February 20, 2019 at 10:25
Now this is very interesting indeed! You get it right with a tool like logic, but wrong with a tool like a ruler! We use a ruler to inform ourselves. ...
February 20, 2019 at 09:32
Hurrah! Someone who gets the reasoning. :100: I can accept these sort of possibilities. I never denied them. I don't think that they're a real problem...
February 20, 2019 at 09:14
Are you purposefully ignoring me now? Can we be friends again? I'm sorry! :cry: Even if that were so, it would only mean that it cannot knowingly be s...
February 20, 2019 at 08:53
You said that we usually know what people mean when they use terms in context. I used terms in context. Therefore, what I meant is something which is ...
February 20, 2019 at 08:36
:lol:
February 20, 2019 at 08:25
No, it's more like you having the bright idea of removing all of the wet floor signs when the floor has yet to dry, in the meeting place for an academ...
February 20, 2019 at 08:08
Would it B2 much to ask for you to explain what that is? (And no, I can't google it. My google is... er... broken).
February 19, 2019 at 23:26
What's the key point that I've been saying about surety, otherwise known as certainty? For what feels like the zillionth time, we don't need certainty...
February 19, 2019 at 22:49
I was just making a general point based on what you said. In hindsight, that wasn't very clear at all. I didn't mean you personally, but rather an imp...
February 19, 2019 at 22:07
If you want to get technical, then yes, you didn't say that. It was logically implied when you said, "defining our terms is necessary". You even quote...
February 19, 2019 at 21:58
Yes, I am. I am hearing your irrelevant nonsense loud and clear. When I asked, "What?", that wasn't because I didn't hear you, it's because you weren'...
February 19, 2019 at 21:20
Would the pencil drop to the floor? We don't know for sure, but certainty isn't necessary. Could it rise to the ceiling instead? Yes. However, if we'r...
February 19, 2019 at 20:02
But it very clearly isn't. However, it will lead to contradiction for you if you do something dumb like interpreting it as saying "untrue truth" or by...
February 19, 2019 at 19:50
It's funny when they make self-defeating claims like that. This one is funny too: Okay, so it's not the case that, as I'm walking home, unbeknownst to...
February 19, 2019 at 18:52
Your question was clearly loaded. The question, "You just now realized that my objection to your thought experiment is based in semantics?", clearly s...
February 19, 2019 at 18:47
This place isn't for them, then. We have a significant number of low levels here. (N.b. a significant number doesn't necessarily equate to most, and i...
February 19, 2019 at 17:48
:roll: No, you're catastrophically inept if you can't recognise the reasonableness in my argument that rocks would exist, which is an unconfirmed trut...
February 19, 2019 at 17:19
Oh look, a non sequitur.
February 19, 2019 at 12:42
@"praxis" But we are open to all, including the low levels, and the low levels need guidance. If you're a high level who lets something as trivial as ...
February 19, 2019 at 12:31
No. You're missing the point. People like myself and @"Janus" understand how the logic words. We understand that producing a fallacious argument in su...
February 19, 2019 at 09:25
Sure, there'd be two sides to the argument. This isn't a one sided thing. But I may have already gone over my side, leaving the problem of trying to f...
February 19, 2019 at 09:02
Obnoxious, childish, patronizing, overbearing, middlebrow? Sure, whatever. I'm not everyone's cup of tea. But stupid? Never! :grin:
February 19, 2019 at 08:51
Reasonable doubt. Not just doubt for doubt's sake. :roll:
February 19, 2019 at 00:07
I'm a contrarian, so I disagree with your disagreement. Okay, then on that note, let's unpin the guidelines. After all, it may give the impression tha...
February 19, 2019 at 00:05
Are you a brick wall? Because I feel like I'm talking to one. I began with my doubt of their claim, which your advice seems to forget. That suggests t...
February 18, 2019 at 23:55
So, let me see if I've got this straight. If I'm in a discussion with someone, and they make a claim which I doubt, and I ask them if they can present...
February 18, 2019 at 23:29
I'm not overly concerned about what side of your imaginary gate you think I'm on. This imaginary gate of yours is merely a manifestation of your infla...
February 18, 2019 at 23:10
Never mind. I can't be bothered to untangle that.
February 18, 2019 at 22:43
He's only right because I agree him and wrong otherwise. It's all about me, really. Everyone should bear witness to me, not him. Me, me, me, me, me, m...
February 18, 2019 at 22:22
So until I define every term in this sentence, you have no idea what I'm saying. I might as well just be banging my head on the keyboard. Ghjnnbvcgjkk...
February 18, 2019 at 22:11
You already corrected him. And I see what you did there.
February 18, 2019 at 21:59
When did you become so sensible? Maybe I just missed it before. Anyway, I like this you. (And yes, I do judge sensibleness on a scale with myself at t...
February 18, 2019 at 21:52
*raises hand*
February 18, 2019 at 21:50