Pie

It's a pretty serious offense though, whatever the reason. "Scum that infects the nation" is violently dehumanizing.

I'd say no, but we, who do infer, might explain them in inferential terms. We could also mathematically model the situation, I suppose. Why not ? But ...

What's your operational definition of this thinking ? If not a beetle in a box, then presumably there's something ? I don't think you mean disposition...

What I had in mind was your mention of behaviorism. To me, behaviorism is clearly on the right track, but too rigid, insufficiently sensitive to just ...

I think this is the natural way to think of it. But I take it to be one of the great discoveries of philosophy to have flipped things around. This fli...

I see. We can joke too. We do want to be machine men. Was it not you who introduced folk psychoanalysis, calling Brandom and Sellars 'anal', railing a...

:up:

I may be more in the middle. There's great stuff in Heidegger and Derrida, two of his favorites, but I like dragging that stuff over toward a more ana...

Oh he's beautifully mad though. His Hegel is both cutting-edge and reactionary. It's like sci-fi. Yet I think much of it endures.

:up: I think we should make it simple in just way (or close enough.)

For me, it's hard not to simplify this into : "the sky is blue" is true if and only if the sky is blue. The temptation is to say more, to explain trut...

:up: I lean that way, though it might be hard to formalize. Stats might be an exception. P-values roughly measure the probability of chance being resp...

He's fun though.

Indeed. Transformation is patently constant, but changes in the norms are governed by those same changing norms. And, well known, I think... But Googl...

As Kojève puts it, man is time is the concept existing empirically.

I think the spatial metaphor 'external' is not so bad. The world encompasses little ol' me.

:up:

:up: Well said !

The situation might be described as an intergenerational dialectic, with science advancing one funeral at a time (if the old dogs refuse to learn new ...

If you are referring to the concept of belief, you give me all I need, which is that it's essentially a public concept, however flexible. It's the cla...

:up: And given the importance of 'know thyself,'... Another approach: it's we who are making sense of the cat, and we aren't going to do that in cat-s...

I like to think I take it quite seriously. I take it that the Enlightenment was the big event. This is when the space of reasons blossomed, when reaso...

Is this so clear ? Why then do we value warrant ?

:up: Bacon writing it adds even more complexity, because it's plausible that Bacon identified with Pilate and understood Pilate to be mocking some gra...

FWIW, this is precisely what my "our minimal epistemic commitment" thread is about. I like your quote, but I don't see it taking those pesky assertion...

Do you actually....believe this ? Do you endorse this as a claim that I should take seriously ?

If you mean if you know what would make it true, then that seems (tentatively) right. It seems philosophers can only manage to make sure their beliefs...

Inferentialism makes a good case for building a theory on assertions. If irony is the trope of tropes, we get lots of mileage from a little spin on an...

I agree there are lots of ways to make sense. That belief is far from the most important is so far a mere claim. I tend to think it's central for phil...

Well now, that's not what I had in mind, but I guess ? Note that the second statement is easily rewritten as 'I will die, if I am decapitated.' I note...

Oh I know we see this issue differently. I think the concepts are loose enough here, unanchored as they are by any practical application, that it's po...

Go on. The essay explores that theme, tries to give it its due. I'm still making up my mind. I think maybe warranted beliefs are what's important. I'm...

To me, his not knowing about his own mind...gives him something external to that mind. If a man has a Freudian unconscious, he has an unexplored basem...

I can maybe relate, but I think we still have to resolve the ambiguity, because there are versions of God (fixed versions) that I might accept (and th...

So for you it preexisted us...and you are not a platonist ? My take is that the 'I' is logically/semantically an appendage of the 'we.' The self that ...

I learned what \pi was in the context of an axiomatic system, as intimately related to the first positive zero of a famous trigonometric function. Its...

I understand why one would. But if no one else had ever existed, it'd be hard to find a meaning for 'pi.' Of course there'd be no language in the firs...

Nor I. But I speculate that it doesn't make much sense to get math wrong if you are the only being. I suppose we must allow the edge case of the sole ...

That might explain some of our talking past one another. To me, electrons and marriages are just characters in a story too. We call some stories true.

How do you feel about Hamlet ? Or Charlie Brown ? I feel no loyalty to any definition of the real. I don't take a vision of elementary particles 'behi...

But could that-which-exists not be understood as including tendencies and relationships ? What of the conception of an entity as essentially relationa...

:up:

OK. John doesn't know that he knows of everything that exists. I'll add that to my computations.

So maybe we agree (if we can find a congruent terminology) that there's just true claims ? We are both minimalist on this issue ? Prosentential perhap...

I think the coins are a different scenario. It's possible that the inference I actually challenged was not your considered position. To me the issue l...

I know I said I'd drop this issue, but this caught my eye. (1) If it exists, I know of it. Now assume that something I don't know of exists. Then I kn...

That sounds correct. It's hard to disallow meanings of sentences in ordinary conversation, but this is perhaps more conflation of P with 'P'. The 'mea...

You are cryptic. I like terse, but please give me a little more to decipher.

I think \mathbb{N} is the wrong way to go. I think we agree ?

We should perhaps allow that a community can jointly declare or endorse P. So the point may more about language than the first-person, though of cours...