plaque flag

I removed you from my ignore list out of curiosity, a mistake easily rectified.You only mystify yourself. But have fun with that. No hard feelings.

Note that I'm not saying we have to accept Mary's talk. I'm saying that 'what red is like for me' has a genuine role in the human discussion. Mary may...

In this context, rationality is more normative than instrumental. Apel's strong thesis is that his transcendental semiotics yields a set of normative ...

:up: I'm glad we seem to agree here. If I recall correctly, you don't love the phrase 'fundamental ontology,' but I am just reaching for something lik...

I think she can. To me the big insight from Brandom/Sellars is the space of reasons. Sapient use of concepts is normative. Mary can explain a belief o...

:100: It's a relief that someone else gets it. Zahavi interprets Husserl and Braver interprets Heidegger in this same general way, tho of course there...

The common denominator of this otherwise rich and ramified group of phenomena is the feeling of the individual that his consciousness expanded beyond ...

To me, transrationalism is sophisticated, educated irrationalism. I mean that in a value-neutral way. Nietzsche's Christ takes 'the inner' to be first...

The point is just that those logical norms themselves must be real in order for you to appeal to them as authoritative, therefore making your own conc...

To me, respectfully, it looks like your own biased understanding of what is real is the problem. A 'mind-independent judgment' sounds like a judge-ind...

I think that there is a way to do radical relativism without contradiction, but it requires irony and disclaimers. If it's only a private logic in whi...

It's not so unlike a demystified version of logos in the sense that science and philosophy dialectically and autonomously determine / reveal / establi...

If you get curious, Zahavi's brief book is dense with great stuff. There's a pdf to circumvent buyer's remorse. (I like paper, but it's nice to be sur...

I think we can use the transcendent intentional object approach and just emphasize that the object can be almost impossible to see with any clarity. I...

:up: I basically agree with you. And I was trying to say something like this is my own way. The world is only given perspectively. It's like an object...

Excellent quotes again. Did you ever check out Husserl ? Might be relevant to this issue. Well @"Joshs" and I have been off topic (we could be debatin...

@"Art48" seems to adopt a 'Kantian' idea that God is hidden from us by our own looking at him. This is like saying that the trees are in the way of us...

I claim it's both, and I'm happy to debate the point in a friendly spirit. I invite you to join this thread: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion...

Thanks for the quote ! I didn't mean to imply that W denied it. Just that a stereoscopic view makes sense. If you want to dig into this, I started a t...

:up: Thanks, and it's nice to feel understood.

This might be the essence: So long as we pay sufficiently close attention to the reasons that can be offered for and against various claims, their tru...

More of the above. People make 'assumptions' that they don't even realize they've made. Maybe there's a trapdoor under the rug, but no one has bothere...

Personality is a lens. We always project/expect as we interpret. We read in the light of these expectations. Our whole past, what we think of as behin...

:up: Yes. Tricky issue, but 'true' describes belief. To call a statement true is to tell you about my belief. If you trust me, it's also telling you a...

If you clarify this I might agree. But let me offer this: Does The assertion that it is raining is warranted. mean It is raining. ?

I see the difference as massive, so it's largely a logical point about how language works. 'Oppression' has a role as a token in a 'game.' It's like a...

The issue of real spirituality is, in a certain sense, the real issue period. This was my basic concern when I took up philosophy, and I've never stop...

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound annoyed. I wasn't. I was razzing you is all.

I think you aren't reading me as charitably as you might. I'm perfectly able of just asserting a theology which would, without any justification, come...

You are way too touchy about entity or object as mere pieces of terminology. Yes I myself am an entity or an object. Does not hurt my feelings at all.

:up: Not everyone, but we --- people in freeish societies -- inherit Socratic software. As discursive subjects we largely are that software.

Like I said, respectfully, magic stones in a hidden dimension, assumed to be cognitively inaccessible from the very beginning. It's (nonobviously) mys...

The philosopher as such can't earnestly question the reality of normativity. The mystic or the sociopath can, but they could only argue for its unreal...

If they aren't fundamental, your own claims about them lack leverage or 'force.' It's like going before the court to argue that argument itself is not...

Sure. But I already did. Maybe you missed it ? I gave a nice, long quotation above.

If we already are the 'hidden' thing, then it's not hidden ? To me the deepest meaning of the incarnation metaphor is that we are God in mortal flesh ...

To me it's a given (absolutely fundamental) that rationality (phenomenology, philosophy, ontology, science in the highest sense) determines its own es...

Nice issue. Husserl makes a case that the present isn't pointlike. The 'living present' is a kind of stretched apriori structure. He used our experien...

FWIW, I embrace perspectivism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspectivism As far as we know, the world is only ever given perspectively. I'd just say...

Indeed. It really doesn't matter if we call it 'philosophy' or 'fundamental ontology' of 'big picture synthesizing talk.' There's a mode of discourse ...

I love Nietzsche, so I don't mind the detour, but keeping the function of the author in mind, along with our diligent avoidance of arguing from the fa...

I understand why someone would claim this, and I readily agree that the social aspect is necessary. But I don't think it's exhaustive. Ought we deny o...

I think it's more like two sides of the same coin. You talk of wavelengths a moment ago, and I presume you rely on the public inferential aspect of th...

:up:

:up: I think we can also just look at our dogs and cats.

I suggest that we might think of God/Jesus as an object seen from different 'perspectives.' A personality is a position in 'interpretative/hermeneutic...

This questioning itself is an expression of the autonomy norm that makes philosophy intelligible. Why should I regard @"Bob Ross" as more than a monke...

I'd say it's both. Husserl's categorial intuition is helpful. Once we are 'in' a form of life, including its inferential norms and more basic ostensiv...

I don't mean simple instrumental rationality. Respectfully, you are appealing to rational norms as you attack them. The alternative is that your are a...

Nietzsche in other passages gives Kant hell for making the real world (this one) an illusion. I'd say that we should just look at the entire encompass...