Pie

Who is this one ? Is this not the issue ? Is he saying that he cannot know ? Or that it's the nature (psychological) of other minds that they can't kn...

Yes. You keep making claims about the private minds of others, which should not be possible, unless the entities in those minds are part of the usual ...

Because you haven't explicitly adopted my suggested understanding of it, I was trying to figure out yours. How do you cash out 'representation' ?

:up: Or (to save the metaphor) we can let the territory be all that is the case and the map be what we are warrant to claim is the case (our set of ra...

Agreed! But the first one, the first time seeing it in the theater,...

I think there are two issues here that are getting entangled. One issue is logical/grammatical. This is what I've been focusing on. The second involve...

I can easily imagine vats. I've seen The Matrix and lots of other sci fi (like the happy world of the 'dead' in Black Mirror). Trust me, sir. That's n...

You might want to look at this thread : https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13308/our-minimal-epistemic-commitment-fixing-descartes-cogito As @"...

I think this leans on psychologism, as if logic were mere facts about human cognition and not normative, a thesis that can only be established if it i...

I don't dispute that rational agents can make true or false claims. Much of what we do (so runs the theory) is keep score on the noninferential claims...

:up:

Yes, granted. That's not the issue.

I refer just to the usual, practical distinction of what seemed to be the case and what is the case. 'I thought I paid the rent, but that was just a d...

I guess I'll grant you this edge case (that there can be a last rational agent in the universe), but this is a mere crumb. My primary point is that ep...

Actually, it's almost the reverse. Logic and rationality are ego-transcending. That's how we use them and why we value them. An insane person can fear...

You aren't quite understanding me. Perpend. "In epistemology, epistemological solipsism is the claim that one can only be sure of the existence of one...

Note that your perspective (on its face is radically 'for you.') The implication's are highly impractical. Why go to the doctor to get a bone set and ...

Hi. I'm aware of that theory. I sketch it in my thread. I criticize it elsewhere like this, following Ryle and Nietzsche. I think Sellars makes a good...

:up:

Noumena. Of course people still debate the best interpretation, and I understand why the concept was tempting (as the territory), but I suspect the th...

What you say has merit, but consider this edge case : A man will be tortured for hours for information he does not have. He will then be killed. Is it...

Yes, I had that in mind as a possible answer, except I think Kant was wrong to go there.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Does it make sense for worldself to be wrong about a worldself ? Let's say you go Freudian and give this blob a...

I like this idea, by the way. We could keep finding tinier, more and more quasifundamental things.

Personally I don't think there needs to be one, nor must we even think of stacked layers. But where then is the territory ? Is it maps all the way dow...

I currently prefer to say that there are electrons and promises and itches and noses...all of them caught up in the same causal nexus. I willing to re...

The epistemological solipsist is making a claims about norms that transcend him, about what any rational person ought to assume or not, about a world ...

So what is the territory made of ? Is there a deepest layer ? I'm not trying to be difficult. I genuinely don't think we can cash the check of 'territ...

What's that ? I can't hear you. And if I could, .... Do you see how your reasoning aims beyond yourself towards me, attempting to bind me ? "It's impo...

That doesn't exclude much. I count the social sciences, etc.

Presumably, but that's ambiguous. Are electrons part of the map of tuna fish sandwiches and promises and itches ? Are electrons real and promises not ...

In this analogy, you have two objects, but what is the territory corresponding to scientific maps like ? If all we ever have of it is maps ? To me, el...

Of course I know what you are getting at, but then here we are in language trying to gesture beyond it. My point was coming from a perspective influen...

I was thinking of this on my bikeride this morning. 'The map is not the territory.' But what do we make of this ? At the moment, I think it's just the...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you aren't quoting me there, just paraphrasing. Here's what I said yesterdayish: We might say the self has two others, on...

Could you provide an example of words representing nonwords ?

Perhaps I've found the issue. Let me emphasize that I don't deny that a madman can believe he's all alone in a dream. I could even be a dream right no...

I find this leap so problematic that it's hard for me to believe you see where I'm coming from. You keep mentioning externalism, but that's not quite ...

Not intentionally ! To whom ? Himself ? For what else is there ? To what norms could he refer ? About what world could he be wrong or right ? You basi...

FWIW, I think you are both right. Take 'objective' in its pure sense as unbiased, and science's goal is to objectively settle what a community ought t...

One more piece might be helpful. We can trust Jerry's claim that Martha was wearing a red dress at the funeral because Jerry has never failed us. The ...

'Privacy' is a public concept, else you could not make a point about it (could not be right or wrong.) I don't claim that privacy is illusion, just to...

Nice summary/narration. On this topic, I like to think of a community trying to rationally settle what they ought to believe. The issue seems to be wh...

:up: Peirce is great.

I agree, but it's tempting to those who think from the sense-data model. "All the scientist ever 'really sees' is some immaterial stuff he calls 'red....

Yes. I tried to present a version of a picture that holds many philosophers captive even now. I understand Sellars to have shown that even sensation w...

I dislike being misunderstood myself. This issue reminds me of Sartre. To be a mere object for the other is the essence of shame.

Yes, indeed. I think Schop called it an X and decided it was Will (if memory serves.) I liked Schop for lots of his scaffolding, not so much for this ...

But consider, sir, you are reasoning with me. Am I bound to regard your logic ? If so, why ? And do I not (mostly) understand your words ? I agree tha...

Your view is so close to mine. Do you not see that ? I'm bothering to fix Descartes because I think he was almost saying the right thing. He didn't em...