Apustimelogist

You can use as many "elements" as you want!

That passage is clearly talking about family resemblances imo. But surely "doing better" is just specifying the multifarious different ways language i...

I mean, it would be shown wrong if all concepts had precise, singular definitions that strictly characterized all their exemplars in the same way. And...

What have these advances found to contradict the idea of family resemblance?

I meant demonstration of your claims about is/ought. I am not sure what you mean to convey from that teleology link as it's conclusions seem weak and ...

To me this is just conjecture. We don't know or have models anywhere near detailed enough about the brain to make rigorous claims about what we should...

So you can't demonstrate it? What has that got to do with 'temporal entanglement'? When did I say when I apparently rejected it?

Well I don't see any connection whatsoever. Can you demonstrate this?

:100: :up:

I would be less underwhelmed if you had a substantive counter to my claim that nothing novel is being said. The definition I quoted before is virtuall...

Good lecture on how quantum systems are formally equivalent to stochastic processes (link to papers at start of video though I have linked the previou...

Yes, true. I'm just stating that how an animal's communication isn't thought.

True. I would say that communication just generalizes language. Similarly, what an animal communicates about is different to their actual perceptual/c...

Yes, I would probably say so. Well I just mean in the sense like what is happening somewhere out of your direct perception is not accessible. You cann...

Yes I thimk we agree. To me I don't see the inherent distinction between a public language and a private one other than only one person uses it. So to...

I don't think it matters if someone can read the note, it matters if the criteria for the correctness of words is socially enforced or not. But the fa...

Yes, I have thought before that a.nice counterexample to Wittgenstein's private language argument is someone writing a note to themself to remind them...

Yes, I just mean chains of causal interactions. There is no explicit objective notion of representation, just cascades of neural impulses which then c...

My take on Wittgenstein and his "forms of life" is that absolutely everything bottoms out in behavior. Any interpretation of behavior is inherently in...

It has been applied to field theory! References for such application to field theory are given in (e.g. you'll find them if you search the phrase "fie...

My hope are quantum interpretation turn away from woo and back toward realism. It is very underappreciated that complete formulations of quantum mecha...

In fairness, I don't think I could explain to you what "to do" means if you didn't already have the intuition! I don't need that explanation to use th...

Apologies, I was thinking more about the literal meaning of the phrase. The phrase "to do something" in your reply or "to do" I would say are more or ...

Can you give an account of "do this" which is much more coherent than obligation and its synonyms though? Maybe you can and I haven't thought about it...

Yes, fair enough; and I guess most people (I think... in normal societal circumstances anyway... not sure about some extreme kinds of moral trolley-es...

Interesting. Makes morality sound like a problem of maximizing entropy under constraints.

I feel like the problem with challenging "obligations" based on meaning is that conceivably there are various other concepts we might use all the time...

I think he could be right but then again, I think we allow people the right to do what they want within limits. Is everyone realistically moral all th...

Aha, apologies! Well my perception is the phrase "how can we still justify livestock farming?" could conceivably include all of these kinds of moral p...

Well yes but I am not sure those kinds of answers are the ones you had in mind when you brought up the question. That seems implied when you gave the ...

Maybe its hard to justify livestock farming but maybe a livestock farmer can still justify livestock farming in order to make a living with little oth...

I feel like Bayesianism is the most general and all the others can be looked at reasonably well through a Bayesian lense. For instance, it seems there...

I'm not sure I agree that I see a strong connection between individualism, moral anti-realism and people's ethics in modern society. At least not in t...

I mean your "criticism" of the modern world is just so insanely reductive view that I could never agree with it. I find these views have a real lack o...

I don't think that is relevant and what people need can always be cashed out in terms of them liking or wanting to be in particular state. In that sen...

The whole idea of human flourishing is meaningless is it doesn't fulfill things people want or like. You cannot be "flourishing" and simultaneously no...

Well I think human flourishing essentially comes down to what people like and want. I mean, if Aldous Huxley isn't offering a utopian vision of human ...

I get this view but it seems kind of trivial to me because clearly what is "objectively good" depends on each specific context and what people happen ...

I think you can believe something is good without simultaneously believing that good is an objective property, hence the difference between ethics and...

My issue with this is that there is absolutely no requirement to postulate objective goodness to explain these things, and to my mind the ontology of ...

This is exactly the sort of thing that leads someone to be an anti-realist so I don't see that as a criticism. An anti-realist is led to the position ...

Yes, so you have lots of animals engaging with the same world. This doesn't really count for animals though because they aren't using words. The sheep...

What is pragmatic depends on how a particular animal lives its life. We are perfectly capable of inventing a multitude of completely coherent concepts...

I think its about plurality. Endless plurality. We can point at any aspect of a scene we want. Maybe there's no fact of the matter. But surely the wor...

I think you could if you gave them a reason where they needed to use those concepts, where those concepts suddenly became useful and had statistical s...

Sometimes objects seem simpler than they really are because you can just implement a particular kind of control where you can ostensively point at thi...

Or perhaps simply these "things" are statistics, to completely deflate the idea of an object. This would simply be a matter of what brains do - infer ...

But is this a child detecting objects or a child that is detecting statistics (which maybe has been honed over development too)? You then ask that doe...

But then surely the concept of an object as an objective thing would be incoherent?

Strange. We seem to in principle put labels around things any way we want, nevertheless there seems to be directly apparent underlying distinctions th...