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

S

Comments

I didn't say that there aren't rules for English, and there is no contradiction between it being the case that language has rules sufficient to create...
February 09, 2019 at 19:34
I doubt that anything that he says will bring greater clarity. On the contrary, it will compound the problem by creating a greater need for clarity. I...
February 09, 2019 at 18:27
It's a common misunderstanding. You aren't the first, and you won't be the last. Even a dinosaur like Banno has these kind of misunderstandings.
February 09, 2019 at 17:41
So it's not a fact that I'm standing here right now? What's happening right now hasn't already happened. That would be absurd. So it can't be a fact u...
February 09, 2019 at 17:27
Facts are not standard-relative because they're determined by what's the case, unless that's a standard, in which case it would be the only standard, ...
February 09, 2019 at 17:12
Yes, I have. I'm confident that I'm right, and I just can't bring myself to sift through your confused ramblings.
February 09, 2019 at 15:55
Very odd question. I would advise them to learn the language in the usual ways, and use the usual resources, such as a dictionary or a language learni...
February 09, 2019 at 13:47
You're certainly missing something. A key difference between what's required for there to be understanding and what's required for there to be meaning...
February 09, 2019 at 08:50
I'm not disputing your point, I'm disputing its relevance. I think that your interpretation of Rovelli was uncharitable. More uncharitable assumptions...
February 08, 2019 at 17:33
Cut down the eyesore, and I'll read it. I'm not in the mood for a word search.
February 08, 2019 at 16:58
But it wouldn't apply to me. I've clearly distinguished the criteria between the one and the other. Yes. And? No it doesn't. You and I could agree on ...
February 08, 2019 at 16:22
Not interpreted for what? We interpret meaning in order to gain an understanding. I'm not disputing that. My point was simple and easily understood. I...
February 08, 2019 at 15:21
Yet you know the meaning of what I'm saying right now.
February 08, 2019 at 14:29
Actually, if these experts are legitimate, then it would be a valid appeal to authority, and he also talks about conducting various empirical tests. H...
February 08, 2019 at 14:09
Yes, but it's his coping mechanism. He is human, all too human.
February 08, 2019 at 12:59
Can you cut that down, please? I don't believe you would've needed to use so many words in response to such a simple point about logic. I'm not readin...
February 08, 2019 at 12:37
The best outcome is the one which best reflects reality. It's counterintuitive that all of our moral statements are false. That doesn't seem to best r...
February 08, 2019 at 12:31
I can fix that. @"Hanover", fetch my incinerator!
February 08, 2019 at 01:57
But that's not a valid argument. I've tried with you, but you're hard work. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. That's not a v...
February 08, 2019 at 01:37
Ah, so you're an error theorist? But that's a pretty useless outcome, isn't it? Don't you think that it would be better to move on to better ways of g...
February 08, 2019 at 01:22
I didn't read your opening post, but whatever it is you were asking for advice on, I say go for it.
February 08, 2019 at 00:37
Oh no! Jesus Christ! No! For the love of God! Heaven forbid! Anything but that! Father, why have you forsaken me?!
February 08, 2019 at 00:30
I have felt the loving embrace of The Flying Spaghetti Monster, and I will never turn away from Him. His noodley appendage has touched my heart. He bo...
February 08, 2019 at 00:27
Is anyone "better" than anyone? Yes. :smirk:
February 08, 2019 at 00:14
The standards obviously do not make the statement true or false in an absolutist sense, only in a relative or conditional sense. But this absolutist s...
February 07, 2019 at 23:26
No, not obviously at all. It seems more like you've taken what he said out of context. As per The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, "Aristotle is ...
February 07, 2019 at 22:35
February 07, 2019 at 21:43
That's trivial and irrelevant with regard to morality because of the context, not because it's about you. It's trivial and irrelevant because it's abo...
February 07, 2019 at 21:40
Either Fred doesn't share our standard of judgement, meaning that he judges it to be okay to kick the puppy, like he insists; or he does share our jud...
February 07, 2019 at 21:08
You're welcome. Fascinating. Please continue. I want to hear all about it. Believe it or not, that's actually what brought me to this discussion. I sa...
February 07, 2019 at 20:49
Ah, the typical unhelpful Banno one-liner for which you've gained notoriety. Maybe we should sort this out before continuing. Are you going to be coop...
February 07, 2019 at 20:32
I agree that they're not the same: that much is obvious. But I certainly don't agree that the former is not moral in nature. That's absurd! What I oug...
February 07, 2019 at 20:03
Carlo Rovelli is a theoretical physicist who has made significant contributions to the physics of space and time. He has worked in Italy and the US, a...
February 07, 2019 at 19:39
Sounds good to me.
February 07, 2019 at 19:13
In what sense, and how? Not logical implication, not in and of themselves.
February 07, 2019 at 19:10
How can you call that a moral fact when nothing follows from it about right or wrong or what one ought or ought not do? I say that it's not a moral fa...
February 07, 2019 at 18:50
That conditional is not true in and of itself. It would require one or more additional premises, premises which others might well have good reason to ...
February 07, 2019 at 18:37
Whatever the meaning of "good", a moral subjectivist who is a moral relativist avoids contradiction by having relative standards of judgement which co...
February 07, 2019 at 18:22
I've just realised that your claim isn't even compatible with your stance of moral nihilism, if I've understood it correctly. If you're a moral nihili...
February 07, 2019 at 10:18
In: Brexit  — view comment
Theresa May is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
February 06, 2019 at 20:11
You don't get to choose what's the case, and meta-ethics is about what's the case. You seem to be muddling up meta-ethics and normative ethics. I'm no...
February 06, 2019 at 19:27
Yes, I know that you're a moral nihilist. You're fooling yourself if you think that you don't have an ethical position. You're a performative contradi...
February 06, 2019 at 19:05
It doesn't even really count against it. It's a bit like throwing a toothpick at a tank. The theory never presented itself as foolproof, and that's wh...
February 06, 2019 at 18:39
In: Brexit  — view comment
It is a negotiating tactic, but whether or not they'll relent is much less certain. Now more than ever, in this world of Brexit and Trump, it isn't sa...
February 06, 2019 at 13:57
No it doesn't, not to anywhere near the level required to reject the theory. That would be like saying that we should reject the scientific method bec...
February 06, 2019 at 13:10
Well, yes, there's definitely a disconnection in those cases where the activities fail to provoke moralising - and there are plenty examples of that -...
February 06, 2019 at 12:19
Fact check of Donald Trump's speech.
February 06, 2019 at 12:01
Sabbatical-shmabbatical.
February 05, 2019 at 16:50
I don't see any relevance in that to what I said. Did I say that feelings aren't provoked by events? Did I say that the harm of murder is completely i...
February 05, 2019 at 16:39
Boring Banno's blinkered banality brazenly bypasses brilliance by blocking breakthroughs. Boring Banno's blithering balderdash backfires believably be...
February 02, 2019 at 00:06