Leontiskos

Here is the link that was buried in the original post, which I have verified is working: "Can We Speak About That Which Is Not? Actualism and Possibil...

At this point in the thread you have the burden of proof to show that the three stipulations are consistent with your claim that <it is sometimes perm...

Yes, I was thinking of the same analogy. Right, good. I think it is worth asking this question of why Frege distinguishes the assertoric force from th...

Are fictional assertions true? Here is Frege: The very next sentence of the unabridged text begins the section on dissociating the assertoric force fr...

Yes, and it need not even be limited to logical sentences. It applies to any piece of language. I am saying that we do not have any notion of what a p...

Ah, so your response to Count Timothy had to do with Marcionism or Gnosticism? I think this could make for an interesting thread.

Who are you thinking of? I have a hard time believing that someone who understands potency/potential could leave it out, at least on the basis of empi...

Here is my edit in case you didn't see it: For me the paradox is too obviously contradictory to be a good candidate for exercises regarding misinterpr...

Very interesting. That all makes sense, and fills out my understanding a bit. Good, and this is more accurate than the way I was stating it. My idea w...

Good, this is precisely the way that it sheds light on the OP. Yep, this helps a great deal to clear away the tangential issues. Right. Isn't she, tho...

So then you think pacifism fails for two reasons: both because it is permissible to intentionally harm others, and because pacifism is impracticable. ...

Let me first say that I think the first half of your first post was excellent and deeply relevant. As to the second half, about Moore's paradox, I con...

I am disputing your (2). For Frege we don't quantify things and then go on to decide whether they actually exist (and this is very much related to you...

- Great posts. I am struggling to see the difference here, but maybe that is just me. I was understanding @"J" to be saying that propositions can have...

Right, good points. And Kimhi interacts with some of these scholars a great deal, some hardly at all. I have never heard of him, but I haven't kept up...

Then you are directly denying #3. It is impermissible to choose harm on such a basis given the three stipulations. (1) and (2) form an exhaustive divi...

I don't think this is correct at all. Here is Frege: Given this evidence it would seem that it is incorrect to claim that for Frege quantification is ...

For starters, I don't see how you can claim to accept all three stipulations and then argue for harm consequentialism. The stipulations logically enta...

No one said it was damning. Is mine the hobby horse, here? If you are averse to the topic of a thread, why post in it? After all, if you are ultimatel...

- I think it is a useful tool, but Frege thought it was more than that and it seems he was wrong. When one sees that Frege's system is insufficient it...

This is pretty stark consequentialism, is it not? Especially your final sentence?

Yes, that's fair. :up: I don't think it is a question of whether there are non-logical forms of discourse. That can be granted. The question is whethe...

"I" always refers to the person speaking the sentence, does it not? These are two different claims: It is raining and I don't believe it is raining. I...

The simple argument from Geach in Kimhi's book is that p has assertoric force in (2) but not in (1): p ? q p ? q What you seem to be saying is that if...

The difficulty, which also strikes me as a red flag, is that Kimhi provides no bibliography. Therefore it probably goes without saying that he has no ...

The closest Frege's system can get to modeling something like this is to say, "There exists something which is both grass and green." Fregian logic ha...

:up: Paul literally has the Son creating the spiritual powers here in Colossians 1, namely the other "divinities" that some in this thread are identif...

The basis is referred to as the Hellenization Thesis, often traced to Adolf von Harnack, but it also has earlier antecedents in many anti-philosophica...

I originally skimmed the works of Gyula Klima when I saw your thread, but I did not see anything related in a precise way. Yesterday I picked through ...

I'm sure the referee will award you a point for eliciting a reply to your trolling.

- That was a devious splicing of many different contexts and conversations, which still didn't get you very far. At this point you've lowered yourself...

I would say that you are not following what you are doing, for your <post> in question is obviously not primarily about the thesis that perception is ...

I think Kimhi has some good insights, but in things like this I wonder if he is pushing his point too far. The problem is that Frag. B2 of Parmenides'...

That's right, and therefore claiming to be the messiah is not blasphemy.

- Good points. :up:

I doesn't need to be. When you claim that breaking the Law is blasphemy, that means that all breakings of the Law are blasphemy. If one can break the ...

Right, but Fooloso will argue against all of these sources and Tim Wood has literally claimed that the Christians of the Council of Nicea did not even...

I think the reason Michael's threads never get fully resolved is because Michael refuses the transparency that is a prerequisite for such resolution. ...

Okay, well I have no idea how (2) is supposed to follow from (1). No one has said you would. The question is why you think (2) follows from (1). As to...

- Is this your argument? The people around us have a say in what colors we see. Therefore, language is necessary for perception. Therefore, babies do ...

Yes, and I gave my interpretation of Banno's statement here, which included a critique of your interpretation: You responded with a question. Would it...

Where did I indicate that? This thread has been running on poor reasoning for dozens of pages, so I think it's time to address the reasoning itself. W...

- And should I answer your question with a different question? You made an argument, I pointed out why it was a bad argument, and then instead of resp...

- Ok. Whatever you say, Hanover.

This seems like the same equivocation between determination and influence that Banno pointed out to begin the exchange. The claim seems to be that thi...

Sure I can see that, but I am wondering if he would be able to provide a legitimate use of "know."

But as I understand it looking closer could never provide Wittgenstein with justification for knowledge, and thus it is odd to say that "looking close...

You said this: I asked you to defend it and you gave a non sequitur argument. Now you are finally admitting, albeit quietly, that you were wrong: So w...

Here is your argument: Speaking against the Law is blasphemy. Therefore, To break the Law is blasphemy. I can explain why this is a non sequitur if yo...

Does the same hold of color? -- The reason color is not a percept is because humans know that there are things which alter our percepts without alteri...