frank

smh

In this case a token became a type. Each of you saw a separate token of a type (of a token).

Anyone?

So who amongst us knows what it's supposed to prove? I'll ask that person.

I don't think you wrote it the first time.

Metaphysically possible, yes. You didn't need Salinas for that. And that proves what?

Sorry.

It conflicts with common sense. That means you have the burden. Chalmers said so.

Most of my kitchen gadgets are self timing. When I say no sense of time, its pretty close to that.

If there's one pain and two of us, that's transcendent. Sounds mystical.

It's actually common sense that Salinas isn't experiencing the same token. You'd have the burden if you want to say otherwise. Extreme assertions requ...

So let's say pain isn't private. You and I can experience the same pain. That means pain is something transcending both of us. Wow.

I think it is, in the sense I'm using "individual" In order to think of yourself as a particular person, you need others to compare yourself to.

It takes a little courage to drop the propganda and think for yourself. That's true on all sides.

If pain is shared through empathy, that's intersubjective. If it can be shared some other way, so what?

I'm not a white guy asshole.

So sometimes pain is only shared through empathy. This does not conflict with English grammar.

That there is no pain that isn't shared.

No, I didn't.

So you're actually serious about this...

That your characterization of the event is wrong.

QAnon was a significant part of that group and they're racially mixed.

Is pain an object like a rose? Or is it an experience? Plus, why would we do philosophy by concentrating on turns of phrases?

So the objective narrative is necessarily closer to the truth?

I'm sorry. What I usually tell people is: your pain is a social construct. Stop talking about it and it will go away. Then I run off before they can s...

1 and 2b aren't about philosophy. 2a is, but that's just a starting point.

It's a map-like image. You don't see it out of your eyeballs. You see it with your mind's eye. Why? What's your definition of objective?

I'm saying you carry an objective image of the world around with you and use it to make sense of your subjectivity and vice versa. That objective imag...

Gotcha. Nice smack down. So you'd agree that society is a prerequisite for individuality, that the subjective narrative is influenced by society, if o...

I think the PLA was supposed to cover that.

Right, and there are no doubt various influences on your choices that come through in your map-metaphor. If you start taking your metaphor as a higher...

No, you'd draw it for them.

Pick a vanishing point, draw lines from the foreground to the vanishing point. Lay your stuff on the lines.

The rules referenced there are the rules of perspective in visual art.

Right, but I think your personal objective narrative goes unexamined for bias. It's pinned as reality, right?

Exactly.

That brings us back around to the intersubjective reality:. for a long time, lines of perspective were a requirement for the production of realistic l...

That's interesting. It highlights the existentialist point that the objective narrative is not necessarily closer to the truth. It's apt to be further...

Ok. It's just that real maps really are objective accounts.

Sauron grew up in a typical Ainur family. Some say he was radicalized during his years as a soldier during WW1, but the truth is, Sauron harbored a di...

Um. Ok.

I don't need a map unless I'm lost. Like if I were to drive through a town in Ohio where every street looks exactly like every other street, I would l...

But since the territory has a simulation in it, the simulation will have to have a fully functional simulation in it and then *eyes start to spin arou...

And I feel sorry for every single one of them. :lol:

I think that question was put on the table by the OP. MU expressed my view pretty well: That's indubitable. Theories are secondary (in my view). Peopl...

So realism for both subjective and objective narratives. :up:

Yes. I basically said this to Mww, but it's not the PLA.

What's your take on reality? Is it a social construct?

This is soft ontological anti-realism: "Anti-realism" isn't a specific view. There's moral anti-realism, bovine anti-realism, etc.

No, I don't think so. It's about rules that only you know about.