Leontiskos

- People on TPF often refuse the burden of proof, even when they obviously have it. When you start a thread promoting equality, then you are clearly t...

- :up:

I actually wouldn't agree with either of these claims. Regarding the first claim, namely that religions do not generally interpret their texts accordi...

Here it is again. Can you answer a simple question?

You simply do not know what you are talking about. For Frege the notation is unified and continuous. The horizontal represents the content and the ver...

This is a good question. It came up last year in quite a few places, and Jimmy Akin gave a broad-brush overview of some of the different approaches. I...

So you would claim that evil creatures like suffering and dislike pleasure?

We could also think about this whole question historically, and through the lens of the agent-patient dichotomy. In ancient times knowledge was seen a...

Count is right, but there is no need to talk about "best." There is an interesting argument to be had about whether better presupposes best, but that ...

Do you see how you evade? Over and over you say, "That's not what I said," but you simultaneously refuse to say what you did say. (Of course it is pre...

Okay, well let me expand on my edit: Leontiskos: If you are acting in accordance with a norm then you must have an understanding of that norm at some ...

There is a difference between a standard and an end, and between a goal and an end, but all standards and all goals are ends. Therefore your eschewal ...

A double judgment-stroke would make no sense for Frege. It is precisely a syncategorematic expression, and therefore cannot be nested in that way.

Good posts. :up: Part of the difficulty here is that "science" is poorly defined, as was shown in <this thread>. I think what you mean by "science" he...

Since at least Plato philosophy and leisure have been seen to go hand in hand.

Yep. :up: More than that, Darwin's theory is itself teleological, as he himself acknowledged (see recent thread). Anti-Aristotelian and anti-religious...

I've asked what your argument is, and I've even tried to represent it: Again: If you are unwilling to state your position clearly and without ambiguit...

Well said. :up: I don't see any coherence in fleeing from aims and purposes, as if one is acting with no aim when they use language.

More evasion from the person who cannot provide a clear answer. @"Srap Tasmaner" spoke of the aim of philosophy (here and here). You claimed that to s...

So you think we should put it on the blender that it has failed to follow a "norm"? Whereas I would not say any of that. Well, you have to be able to ...

The difficulty is that you seem to be the only person in the room who doesn't understand what an assertion is. Not all speech acts are assertions, but...

Right. Means and ends are being confused. :up: When we clean a dirty window we do it to make the window clear, but this is not an end in itself. The e...

What's the difference? (Aquinas will contrast wisdom with knowledge, but it's not a hard-and-fast division.)

So if we use the word "aim" then we're Aristotelians? How utterly strange. You even contradict yourself: If "clarity" is a goal, then it is an aim. Yo...

In a general sense if you ? and we don't know what it is to ? then we don't know what you have done. In fact if someone doesn't know what it means to ...

I think it's definitely good progress. :up: The general point is that a substance and an aggregate are two different kinds of things, and therefore it...

Here is something I have noticed in my time on TPF. You referenced the Meno and the question of whether knowledge is possible. It is, and in every kin...

In the last thread @"J" kept appealing to the community of "serious people" or "professional philosophers," and I kept pointing out that if one restri...

I think norm-following requires rationality. No stipulation required. How so? How is it at all common? We could say, "The blender is abiding by the no...

I don't think that is true. I think the algorithm dictates, deterministically, the movements of the mechanical zebra. That's how computer code works. ...

A substantial form is analogous to an artificial form in one sense, just as a car tire is analogous to an airplane wing in one sense. What remains to ...

I'm increasingly unconvinced that @"Banno" is willing to provide his ends at all. He doesn't seem to even know what he is doing when he does "philosop...

- You've been asking a lot of good questions, even if no answers are forthcoming. :up:

Very true. Still, we can find things to agree or disagree with, and @"J" has disagreed with a few things: I think that even if we can attribute to Wil...

If I write a computer program that starts with an integer and adds 1 every second, is it self-unified towards the end of larger sums? The crucial poin...

I would say that a robot has no inward self-actualizing principle towards specific ends. It has no substantial form because it is not a substance. It ...

Right. Without trying to parse your argument too closely, what I would say is that "chairness" is not a natural end. It is an artificial end, imposed ...

Yes, that is a good example. I'm going to let the thread simmer a bit before adding anything. You and I seem to agree with large portions of Williamso...

That's right. In the previous thread I even focused a bit on the concept of goodness. "Why did you act in that way?" "Because it was a good way to act...

- I agree. My only concern with Williamson is that he at times seems to conflate standards. He seems to say that any discipline is better than no disc...

Interesting. That sounds fine to me, though I don't see "undemonstrated" or "unjustified" as a truth value. I was trying to explain something similar ...

Good posts all around. I sympathize with Williamson. :up: Another way to phrase this would be to say that anti-realists claim to be playing a differen...

So if you say "I feel cold" is not a subjective statement, then what is an example of a subjective statement? In any case, I don't think the common us...

I simply do not think that non-rational norm following is coherent. So to talk about norm-following is to talk about rational norm-following. Because ...

You are doing the exact same thing you did here: The answer is the . Switching from "You are cold" to "You look cold" makes no difference, especially ...

I agree. :up:

compared two people—call them Jane and Sue—who both hand Joe a blanket, judging that Joe is cold. Jane and Sue are involved in the same judgment or as...

For Aquinas the intellect is a power of the soul. So it's not a separate "thing" from the body. It's not like we have three separate "things": a body,...

Fair enough. I would say that this is how all teleology works, namely that it is a final cause and not an efficient cause. The end-directedness produc...

I added a few things to that post, but what do you mean when you say that it is "indeterministic at every scale"? Is it just that it is defeasible or ...