Leontiskos

- Fair enough. I think you are getting tripped up on the difference between signification and supposition. If someone thought that water was not H2O b...

But you must be able to see the strawman here? You say, ' "Water" does not "pick out" what water is.' But who in the world is saying that "water" "pic...

So water was not H2O before chemistry became popular? From the set of sources I already gave you, see Gyula Klima's, "Contemporary 'Essentialism' vs. ...

Glad you're open to reading substantial sources. :up: With Klima and most Aristotelians, we move on after finding contemporary philosophy subpar and r...

It's no coincidence that none of them can accurately characterize what is meant by an essence. For both of you: I dropped references to freely accessi...

- If you find the places in Aristotle where he develops the concepts you will see him considering and critiquing the alternative theories on offer. I ...

Pretty much backwards. Essence is more familiar to us than it was to Aristotle's age, because we are children of Aristotle. Aristotle was forging some...

Yes. @"J" does not understand how a reductio works. As I've pointed out before, a reductio does not prove falsity per se. Instead it proves inconsiste...

That's fair and all, but on the other hand, why the need for Jesus if "simul iustus et peccator" is all one anticipates; snow-covered dung?

Interesting thoughts. I would say that Peirce is a significantly unique thinker, in that he defies a lot of the standard categories. He is certainly a...

Lost a long post... :confused: Basically I think Wayfarer is right in the discussion with Metaphysician Undercover. The Categories supports Wayfarer (...

A good thread for you: The Myopia of Liberalism

Unity in plurality, like Tallis' polyphony, is the Christian watermark.

Unlike Plato, or Sextus Empiricus, or Aquinas, or Descartes, or Kant, or Wittgenstein, or Heidegger, or Adorno? Plurivocity is the sign of a rich text...

Who says Aquinas never jests? :wink:

Martin Luther considered removing the book of James from the New Testament, based in large part on passages such as this which went against the grain ...

Nice. That performance is one of my favorites of his. :lol: I've noticed that most former Mormons approach it this way, and I think it's because in Mo...

Ah, okay. That makes sense. I totally thought of this bit from John Mulaney. :grin: So do you criticize your parents' beliefs? Mormonism is very inter...

Then how is it that so many people convert and de-convert, in large part on the basis of argument? You have a tendency to ignore basic questions like ...

I was going to say, "If you can't argue about religion, then Moliere must still be a Mormon." :razz: So do you pretend to believe when you are with yo...

So I guess all your talk about intersubjective agreement is just lip service after all. You said a really dumb thing and a bunch of people pointed out...

- :brow:

I'd be open to discussing it if we have a primary text to look at. Some of @"Hanover"'s early posts in this thread reminded me of Buber.

Religious argument and religious interaction is the most interesting kind. This is because religion is primordially identical to culture. Before the p...

I'm not convinced that there is any possible world in which no tension exists between the classification of information and the free flow of informati...

Well, the other question is whether the government is interested in the good of pure understanding at all. I was saying that our government would prob...

The forum is full of loose ends you have left hanging. Here is a pertinent one: If you were right that testimony cannot count as evidence then our who...

That's the whole game. Everyone agrees that one should not utilize falsehoods in justifications. Yet the atheist begs the question when they assume th...

It's a conundrum but I don't see it as insuperable. There is a tension between sensitive or classified information and the right to information, but t...

Nailed it. :eyes:

I'm not really convinced that we have a natural right to any piece of knowledge based merely on its existential or ontological import. I think we migh...

I would ask how the fiduciary duties of democratically elected officials impinge on these epistemic questions. In some cases there would be an obligat...

- I have also heard that Three-Body Problem is interesting, although I have not seen that one. As with so much of Villeneuve's work, Arrival is great....

Have you seen Villeneuve's film Arrival?

That looks like a false dichotomy. "Everyone is entirely blind or else everyone has 20/20 vision." If someone is starving and they decide to eat a mus...

I think those are good questions too. I have asked some of them myself. Most recently we saw Janus effectively claim that the racist is not illogical,...

It looks like the crux of this thread is the issue of first principles of knowledge. This is a live issue for anyone who believes that knowledge exist...

Is it against the forum rules to substitute AI responses for your own? I addressed the strange idea of "blind trust" earlier, specifically <here> and ...

:up: Forming a coherent question is half the battle. I don't see that the issue is 'cause' vs. 'reason'. In many traditions they are used synonymously...

Yes, I know. My questions remain. So things which do not make sense are not truth apt. Is that the only time you would ever claim that something is no...

Can it?

In other words: Power accompanies trust Power corrupts Religion involves more trust than non-religion Therefore, at least insofar as trust is concerne...

I have read Buber on this in part. I tend to think he makes too much of the difference, but it would be worth discussing. Is the text publicly availab...

Then I would say that trust is the most abused aspect of life, and that religion is part of life.

Tell me what you mean by 'X' and I'll tell you what I think about 'Y'.

I know Janus isn't a big fan of formal logic, but he seems committed to saying that the following claim is possible: <This religious experience interp...

Why not? And is "truth-apt" the same as "correct"? @"Janus" said it could be correct, not that it could be truth-apt.

More candidly: If there is no way of determining whether something is correct then how could it be said to be correct?

The problem with these conversations is that if you can't say what X is, then you are not allowed to say that X is Y. So if you can't say what faith i...

He's changed his view. My point was that there are people who see faith as irrational, such as Tom (before he changed his view) and Bertrand Russell. ...