NotAristotle

I can see why the premises imply G. I agree with Michael that there is a translation issue. I think I meant to say: 1. not-G -> ( not (P->A) ) 2. ( no...

My understanding of a valid argument is that it is one such that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Sounds like you are saying the...

Am I understanding you to be saying, similarly to unenlightened, that one of the premises must be false given that they are "inconsistent?" The argume...

I think adding content to the logical propositions definitely demonstrates the absurdity of the argument; but it seems to me that the absurdity is imp...

I agree that A -> not-A seems like a questionable premise; perhaps that is the premise you think is untrue. But what makes " A -> not-A " a premise th...

Okay, what about this argument -- https://www.umsu.de/trees/#((A~5~3A)~1A)~5~3A A -> not-A A Therefore, not-A. There must be a difference between impl...

not-G -> ( not- (P -> A) ) not - P does not imply G. in fact, the premises do not actually tell us anything. On the other hand, not- G -> ( not- (P ->...

I am against abortions for religious reasons. A lot of people seem to think consciousness is important to deciding whether abortions should be allowed...

My understanding is that a nucleotide of DNA is the best way of storing information. A nucleotide of DNA is about 2 nanometers in diameter by .33 nano...

whether determined to deliberate or not doesn't really matter. I am content to say that a determinist who deliberates is acting irrationally and he wi...

Perhaps there is a way to integrate POM with the idea of freer choices having priority when there is a dispute over preferences.

I'm not sure I follow this Metaphysician Undercover. You mean to say that when I act according to my free choice, I am actually less free than when I ...

The concern is that when we say "this free choice to use my arm is more important than that free choice to use the cheese grater," one choice cannot b...

Dan, I am not a professional philosopher, but here are my thoughts on the document you posted: As I read, I asked myself, how do you define "good?" It...

That is exactly what I am doing by showing that belief in determinism is consistent with the belief that one should not waste time deliberating. The p...

noAxioms, you said my decision will be different after deliberation then what it would have been had I not deliberated, will it also be better for hav...

I understand the position that my feelings concerning what I could have done could be mere illusions. What doesn't make sense to me is why someone who...

Deliberating can either change one's decision or it cannot not. If determinism is true and I am someone for whom deliberation does make a difference, ...

It would be foolish, but yes.

Yes.

Here is an argument: If determinism is true, then there is no good reason to deliberate because such thought will not change how I decide (I must choo...

:ok: :up: I myself did not catch that.. good point.

Also, I am confused by some of the claims contending that everything is "part of" the universe. In a loose sense, this is true. But there is not some ...

I would object to the notion of a simplest "building block" to the universe. Anything with extension, that is, the sort of things that populate our un...

So I'd like to try to add some nuance to my argument. If determinism is true, there can still be morality in that we can consider an action right or w...

sue me.

Folks, have rightly been objecting to A in my opinion. But if you assume B or not-B, you end up with Not-A. Thus, A -> (notB or B) -> not-A. Or more s...

A -> not A

That is the argument you forwarded.

I am not a logician, but might... "A -> not A" mean that "not (A -> A)." But surely A -> A. Therefore, not "A -> not A."

But Janus, morality may have no rational justification whether determinism is true or not. I think it evident to all that if determinism is true, mora...

"indirectly intended" I'm not sure I understand how someone can indirectly intend something.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.jenanni.com/papers/DeterminismCounterpredictiveDevicesandLaplaceanIntell...

Yes, you really do. But to appreciate the argument -- the argument is not that the illusion is what seems to be the case to you, rather, some may argu...

"And some amoralists or nihilists who think its all "just one damn thing after another" " Here is an argument: If determinism is true, then there is n...

It doesn't matter what the intent is, it matters what object has objectively been contacted by Midas' hand. I thought you said Midas touched a twig, n...

That's an easy one; it would be the tree in its entirety that turns to gold. Not the branch nor the forest, for neither of these are standalone things...

I have to admit my perplexity towards the question you are asking. Am I understanding you to be saying that you are unsure of whether trees are "thing...

forget it

Go ahead, explain fully what you meant, not just in-a-nutshell. Okay, so explain it to me in terms of chemistry and physics, I can wait.

I do not understand the purpose of your line of questioning. Then again, I am not sure that you do either.

Interesting perspective Benj96. So you mean something like, if I had enough knowledge about, say, dark energy, maybe that would fill in the blanks abo...

James Tour has enumerated the known issues that need to be solved for non-living to produce living (in theory although perhaps not in entirety). That ...

Okay, that is fine with me, my point is, and this is what I take to be the central issue, something living, however you define it, emerges from the co...

Can you clarify whether you think there is a difference between living and non-living things, and what you take that difference, if any, to consist of...

"atoms and molecules follow the rules" yep, agree with that, I just think they are also ruled by a further principle, namely, the organism of which th...

your mother never said that, nobody ever said that, except you just now.

Or put another way, living or non-living is the relevant context.

I agree that context matters, although I would also disagree and say that whether living or non-living makes all the difference.

yeah I see what you are saying, the chemicals and reactions and atoms, maybe they did not change their course at all so that living is physically, and...