flannel jesus

23 and me says I'm 98% Asian, therefore I can conclude my parents were Asian.

My dog is shitting, therefore she must have eaten something.

"I think therefore I am" is one - but obviously that's a bit flippant. A woman's on trial for arranging the murder of her husband, by hiring a hit man...

You're absolutely right, but they does not mean the fact of the conclusion literally temporarily happened in time before the facts of the premises. Ju...

That's how language works. You said yourself that you looked up your definition from "official" sources. Why do you get to decide what's right because...

Are there people who don't? How can you tell the difference?

Neither do i, which is why I wonder why early in the thread you tied culpability to determinism.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/therefore#:~:text=(%C3%B0e%C9%99%CA%B3f%C9%94%CB%90%CA%B3%20),a%20logical%20result%20or%20conclus...

Okay, so please link it.

Lovely, I agree with you that you mentioning that outside source IS relevant, because I think that outside sources are relevant pieces of information ...

I don't control what he posts. We're having a meta conversation about why outside sources are relevant when there's a disagreement about how words are...

That's how language works. Language is a social construct. If everyone uses the word 'apple' to refer to one thing, and you use it to refer to another...

I don't understand. You're saying that you're allowed to use outside sources to confirm how a word is defined and used, but I'm not allowed to referen...

I don't know why you're asking that question.

So... you're referencing an outside "official" source? So it IS okay to do that for this conversation then? Please clarify that for me - are outside s...

Disagreemnts about how words are defined and used CAN'T be settled withohut reference to outside sources. Words are socially constructed - if everyone...

double post

Right, so like I said, I've opposed many points, which of my oppositions are you interested in at the moment? Is it about the word 'therefore'? Is it ...

I have opposed many points of yours, I just want to make sure I understand which one you mean right now.

which point specifically? The point about the chronology of therefore?

language is an institution. You said he's going against the standard use of the word - referencing sources that use the words in the way he described ...

References to institutions are there to make it clear that the things I'm saying aren't just invented in my own head. If you had a reference to an ins...

I have. I've explained everything. Happy to explain it again without reference to institutions.

I'm not asking you to argue with me, I'm asking you not to straw man what Fire said. Instead of finding yet a new way to cop out, you might say someth...

Read the first line of his post again, and see the strawman you created. No need to invent your own quotes

I don't think souls add anything to the conversation at all, because souls, if they exist, still evolve over time in a semi-predictable way, they appa...

I'm pleased that this is being spelled out explicitly. I can assure you, most people on this forum don't share your view on this, most philosophers in...

What's the alternative to determinism to you? Is it just some degree of randomness sprinkled in? Like some visions of quantum mechanics suggest?

I don't know, I wouldn't describe myself as a "hard determinist". What do you think the implications are?

I don't take it for granted that determinism means you shouldn't hold someone culpable. That's because the alternative to determinism, to me, seems to...

how is it different? If I ask the question, "Who should we as a society hold culpable", then it what way is that different from the question "Who is a...

Does it have meaning if the universe has genuine randomness?

Moral culpability really, as far as I can see, takes two forms: Internal culpability, which is to say feelings of responsibility and obligation to beh...

I am not qualified to confirm or debate with you if Jesus called himself God in his lifetime, or confirm what most biblical textual scholars would thi...

I think that if you want to read Bart Ehrman's thoughts on the Bible or Jesus, you should do so *not with the understanding that he's going to tell yo...

There's 2 Bart Ehrmans. There's the Bart Ehrman that literally writes textbooks that people who study Christianity in respected universities frequentl...

I don't actually think you're a twat. Believe it or not, people disagreeing with me isn't inherently something that bothers me. I didn't fall out with...

That's not really what you said though, is it?. Anyway, I'll take the belated honest answer given here, you don't know. Wonderful. I don't necessarily...

That's not open and honest. That's just being silly. You're allowed to say something like "I think you must exist to think, but I'm not 100% certain o...

I missed it. What's the answer? I don't think it's loaded, I think it's just completely pertinent. I've answered a number of questions from you, you w...

I'm asking you what you think. I've asked you this before but you keep finding ways not to answer. What do you think? Do you think it's possible to th...

yeah, sure. Do you think it's possible for you to think if you don't exist?

I don't have anything unique to say on the topic. To think, one must exist. It's pretty intuitive.

I'm afraid what's happened is you've read Descartes flowery language and have taken it for granted that translating exactly what he said into symbolic...

it isn't the argument. It's a premise. The full argument spelled out is here https://www.umsu.de/trees/#((p~5q)~1p)~5q

I can't distinguish between that and "p implies q is invalid". What are you saying if you're not saying that?

https://web.stanford.edu/~bobonich/terms.concepts/valid.sound.html#:~:text=Valid%3A%20an%20argument%20is%20valid,argument%20that%20is%20not%20valid.

https://www.umsu.de/trees/#((p~5q)~1p)~5q That's the fully drawn out argument - not just the premise, the argument. That means, arguments that take p ...

So you really think all arguments that take p implies q as a premise are invalid?

Modus ponens and modus Tollens are the most simple proofs in symbolic logic. Each one takes "p implies q" as a premise. If "p implies q" is generally ...