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

S

Comments

Please explain. To be clear, in response to my first question, I would like a reason why not. (I don't doubt what you say is possible). And in respons...
February 15, 2019 at 18:32
That's the best suggestion I've heard for this place in a long time. :100:
February 15, 2019 at 18:25
:grin:
February 15, 2019 at 18:22
I prefer it without the point scoring system. And one problem I see with wanting it to be a reflection of reasonableness is that I doubt that that wou...
February 15, 2019 at 14:13
Spit it out, then. What exactly are you suggesting? You think that I indicated bias and did not question myself enough? Or something else? Please clar...
February 15, 2019 at 13:50
But surely you agree that reasonable people reasonably think others are being unreasonable. So no, what you say above isn't the only explanation for t...
February 15, 2019 at 13:33
Ironically, all of that is irrelevant, and this is going exactly as I predicted. Okay, then by your definition, they don't have a measurement. So what...
February 15, 2019 at 07:49
Because it leads to rocks which suddenly cease to exist the very nanosecond that we all would. Because it can't plausibly explain the world, because i...
February 15, 2019 at 07:28
How would you help the sheep-and-blue-field guy?
February 15, 2019 at 07:16
Typical. Some people just don't learn. :lol: This is a straw man. I have not said or accepted: "X is moral relative to A" is false if A does not belie...
February 15, 2019 at 06:44
Oh dear. What's he gone and done this time? First that thing with the bus, now he's been messing with trains. I predict that Theresa will make him the...
February 14, 2019 at 21:30
But it is conceivable, just like it's conceivable that it would continue to be the case that planets exist, even if we all died in an hours time, with...
February 14, 2019 at 21:04
Goodness is just a concept we use for judging morality. What of it?
February 14, 2019 at 20:45
Ok, then analogously, you're merely talking about what's conventional with regards to morality. The ring is worth thousands and murder is immoral, but...
February 14, 2019 at 20:26
Good for you. :grin:
February 14, 2019 at 20:21
@"creativesoul", now do you believe me? Or do you think that all three of us are wrong, and you're right? I hate to say I told you so, but...
February 14, 2019 at 20:16
What of it? Cut to the chase, would you?
February 14, 2019 at 20:00
It was only a suspicion. I could not at that time think of a way in which they would go about that without letting material objects slip in, but that'...
February 14, 2019 at 19:53
Okay. So they can made a bad argument which leaves a lot of stuff that wouldn't make sense.
February 14, 2019 at 19:48
The idealist would have to explain what kind of evidence would be evidence of other minds, but not also evidence of material things. I would suspect s...
February 14, 2019 at 19:35
Without assuming what you do about location, then I don't understand what the problem is. There isn't one as far as I can tell. That assumption seems ...
February 14, 2019 at 19:12
This is genuinely very funny. But what's interesting is that you don't mean it to be. Do you know that there actually exist driverless cars now? Imagi...
February 14, 2019 at 18:48
One. More. Time. You must either demonstrate an internal contradiction or you must argue in support of your key premises. Why the hell should I care i...
February 14, 2019 at 17:51
Then the idealist is simply wrong. One can demonstrably conceive of an unconceived object. I can, at least. Why should I believe that anyone else is s...
February 14, 2019 at 17:34
It only doesn't make sense to you because of your assumption that everything must have a location. That's not my assumption, and you haven't justified...
February 14, 2019 at 17:13
Okay. I still don't care whether it's that or something else. This seems like a diversion. Yes, in your view. This is that same unreasonable request. ...
February 14, 2019 at 16:52
If the alternative to my position which you describe above logically leads to consequences which are far more absurd, which it does, then you should r...
February 14, 2019 at 16:40
Learn to sarcasm. And learn to read what I said properly: "...like a tautology which completely misses the point...". Ironically, you're missing the p...
February 14, 2019 at 12:51
Great, more philosophy jargon. Please translate that. If you can't explain what it is about it which doesn't make sense to you, then your claim can si...
February 14, 2019 at 12:41
Firstly, I wouldn't even need to argue that they're not abstracts, if that's what I thought, if you're only making a claim without any supporting argu...
February 14, 2019 at 12:29
That's tantamount to proving that a stone exists, and simply pointing out that the assumptions of idealism are unwarranted. You doubt that a stone exi...
February 14, 2019 at 10:31
Again, why wouldn't they? There's no contradiction. I can't do this for you, you know? This is down to you. In this situation, I'm right by default un...
February 14, 2019 at 10:20
I'm going to try to avoid playing this category game with you, but if you categorise my claim in that way, then yes there is a good reason, as per my ...
February 14, 2019 at 10:11
It can for me. If it can't for you, maybe you're setting the bar too high. Obviously I don't agree if that rules out my claim, although I'm not sure i...
February 14, 2019 at 09:49
Why do you think it defeats the experiment? From my point of view, it's irrelevant to point out that you wouldn't be able to think about anything or s...
February 14, 2019 at 08:48
That doesn't come as much of a surprise. Okay, so you've told me your position. I don't accept it, of course. You can attempt to argue in support of i...
February 14, 2019 at 08:39
Knock down argument! You win. This is hilarious, because you probably don't realise that, when analysed, that will be found to say either nothing of a...
February 14, 2019 at 08:07
Sure, but if you've made relevant claims, which you no doubt have, then they carry a burden.
February 13, 2019 at 14:04
Sure. I'm reasonable enough to acknowledge that I haven't presented a fully explicit argument. I am reasonable enough to cooperate where necessary. Th...
February 13, 2019 at 13:43
I have two points. My first point is that, obviously, you can think about, talk about, etc., the thought experiment now. That this wouldn't be possibl...
February 13, 2019 at 13:33
I understand that already. But you don't seem to understand hidden premises. There are virtually always hidden premises in any argument. In light of t...
February 13, 2019 at 12:59
Yes, of course they are not measurements. They are units of measurement. Something doesn't have to be measured to be such that it conforms within a sp...
February 13, 2019 at 12:38
It doesn't make sense to feel such that you judge it to be blue, because, unlike moral judgement, that sort of judgement isn't typically made based on...
February 13, 2019 at 12:00
Valuable in what sense? There's an obvious distinction to be made here between valuable in a variety of senses. Valuable in accordance with monetary v...
February 13, 2019 at 11:50
No, that doesn't follow from my premises, it follows from yours. That's begging the question until you first argue in support of your premises. How ma...
February 13, 2019 at 10:42
I've just realised that this is my constant expression: :smirk: There's no time when my face is not pulling that expression. Except, of course, when I...
February 13, 2019 at 02:30
Yes, and if that fails, rocks.
February 13, 2019 at 02:23
An elephant is pretty. Okay, then. Anyway, goodnight.
February 13, 2019 at 02:14
Ronnie Pickering has a pretty petticoat, and you should have simply provided your full definition, instead of only part of it for some reason. Wait, i...
February 13, 2019 at 02:08
You're funny, and completely missing the point. Thank you for the entertainment. Goodnight.
February 13, 2019 at 01:57