Why would one suppose that either Tillich's "ultimate concern" or else the question "how should I live" are not guided by empirical evidence? Here is ...
- It's pretty interesting to ask about the relation between Positivism and Pragmatism. They seem to be cousins, and at least some pragmatists are posi...
- :lol: - I think folks who see AI as conscious and believe we owe it moral obligations are confused. Nevertheless, one might be "polite" to inanimate...
So Popper talks about what "can be falsified," which is a possibility claim. It is a claim about falsifiability. Given that anything at all can be "su...
So you are claiming that under Popper's thesis "that a scientific theory is one that can be falsified by empirical evidence," Logical Positivism and i...
If you believe that Lavoisier said something true, and that it contradicts Aristotle, then you are committed to the idea that Lavoisier has falsified ...
And do people who contradict those sentences hold to falsehoods? Do false assertions exist? Or have we managed a world where there are truths but no f...
Good post. The vagueness of a "stance" strikes me as a big problem, and this point about cordoning stances off from their downstream "effects" is a go...
This is sort of an interesting thread. I can see how it intersects with your interests, @"J". Note that I am arriving from the citation in . Let's con...
Yes, I agree. The straightforward denial of truth is certainly more transparent and coherent than the equivocal re-definition of truth. Right. This ha...
Yes, hence my whole point that the water goes before the 'water'.* Without some contact with water the sign 'water' has nothing to signify. If you wan...
But why assume they reject democracy? Maybe they say, "I think democracy is the wrong system for our nation; I will vote against it; I hope the vote s...
Classically, if X is true then everything which contradicts X is false. Since both pluralism and relativism reject this notion, the person who wants t...
Like, "Water is transparent"? It seems like my example is an instance of this, but I am certainly open to other concrete examples. It may be confusing...
But this is a strawman. No one has said that there must be a temporal precedence between encountering water and encountering the word 'water'. The poi...
- Right... I guess I would need you to set out the thesis that you believe to be at stake. I wrote that post with your emphasis on falsehood in mind. ...
Unless you want to say that democratic votes require unanimity, they do not illegitimately abolish the freedom of those who voted differently.* In a m...
- I don't think anything you said followed from anything I said, which seems standard at this point. You've gotten to the point where you're not even ...
I'm not so sure. What would an example be? That we become familiar with transparency, and because water is transparent our familiarity with transparen...
A good way to approach this is through shape recognition. If I present you with a triangle or a square, will you be able to recognize the shape immedi...
Yes, in a way, but I think reality comes first. I think we have to have some familiarity with water before we have any sensible familiarity with "wate...
Sure, for example: In general I would say that the mind is not as discursive and time-bound as our age tends to believe. I think this is probably a hu...
I would say that things don't have inherent meanings (at least for philosophy). I think you are still conflating metaphysics with linguistics. Through...
Yes, fair enough. When I used the term "causal nexus" I was careful to make it secondary, after the more primary sense of "contextually situated." Aft...
I think that's exactly right. I think the reason Analytic philosophy likes "possible worlds" is because its reified formalism is logically manipulable...
This is what I spoke to in the . And this is what I spoke to in the last section of that post. For most people, myself included, to believe X is true ...
Sure, you can decide (judge) that the app is to be trusted. Sort of like how you can trust a taxi cab driver to get you to your destination. Still, at...
Yes, I think that's a good way of putting it. A memory has a kind of organic embeddedness, a bit like a single strand of a spider's web. This seems li...
This is a good example of an assertion with no attached argument. I'm not sure why you would think this. An argument would provide me with some insigh...
I'm not convinced that it is a mark so much as a kind of intuitional inference. Suppose you can see the future. A "thick image" comes to your mind. It...
Lovely thread. On my view memories are contextually situated, probably within a causal nexus, and this is what differentiates them from a mere mental ...
Banno here relies on a non sequitur in order to take offense. Fire Ologist says that religious people do not exhibit the traits that Banno is ascribin...
Yes, exactly right. :up: Banno is equivocating. One second he says that faith is neither good nor bad, and the next second he is back to construing fa...
I don't think this thread has ever moved beyond my observation: It could be, "Irrational assent," "Belief without sufficient justification," "Belief w...
I am saying that bona fide nominalists, such as Joyce, would not seem to merely dismiss Peirce's observation as question-begging. I think it would be ...
Okay, but do you see how Joyce would in no way disagree with Peirce that, "all that can be loved, or admired is figment"? He would not say that Peirce...
Except for Hitler, or Stalin, or Pol Pot, or any of the other counterexamples to your assertion that it's always religion. You've presented premises a...
But why would it be irrelevant? You say <Religion/religious fervour is the chief source of global harm>. Suppose I gave a parallel argument <Humans ar...
Hmm, okay. Well maybe the rest will help clarify some of this. No, I don't think machines "judge," hence the scare-quotes on both our parts. Thus when...
There are lots of traditional religious groups (not open to updating) which nevertheless do not engage in the sorts of things you pointed to. I would ...
Okay, let's look. Here is the exchange laid out: You responded: Note that your response has to do with a moral judgment, not merely a moral dismissal....
Or even simpler, "I am not claiming there are no sound inferences from perceptual experiences to empirical beliefs or metaphysical positions; I'm sayi...
This is yet another iteration of your, "I don't have the burden of proof. They do." If you don't believe there are no sound inferences then you would ...
Comments