@"Bob Ross", Antonio Rosamini's thought has been recommended to me as something of a resuscitation of ancient ethics. I have not read him in detail, b...
:up: Christianity says, "Love your neighbor as yourself," not, "Love your neighbor, not yourself." Without self-worth sacrifice is unintelligible. I a...
I think this idea is best addressed historically, as someone like the historian Tom Holland addresses it. In the West what is usually meant by theism ...
Right. This is where we disagree. Take marriage, for example. In the traditional Judeo-Christian understanding of marriage, the two become "one flesh,...
Yes, I think that is fairly close to his claims. :up: I think much of this is correct, but what I find is that usually, at one point or another, these...
I was. You had that in the post I responded to. But crucially, his statement is conditional, "...once you remove the life world." He is not talking ab...
It seems quite different. For example, Thompson says, "But the claim I'm making isn't about existence," and yet the claim that you make is all about e...
Well in that case you are claiming that 'good' involves flourishing, but that flourishing does not exhaust goodness. This is precisely the sort of thi...
Well that dovetails nicely with the point I made <just above>, but let me rephrase my statement: You seem to be saying the very strange thing, "Well I...
@"Michael", I sort of think you are laboring under a cousin of the thesis that J. L. Austin opposed, namely the idea that words can't do things. "If '...
But that in no way contradicts what I said. :chin: Well that's what you said, and that's what your logic requires. Here is what you said, 'So if Arabi...
Then communication is necessarily impossible, for no two word-conceptions are ever identical. When you say "cat" and I say "cat" we do not mean the ex...
It is likely that (2) and (3) are partially true and partially false (and incidentally, (1) is also partially true and partially false). Consider 1. T...
I have no idea. I don't speak Arabic. Why? Your argument is like saying that if I haven't studied C++ then I can't know what "if" means in Java. When ...
When I say, "...disagreeing about what X is," what I primarily mean is, "whether X is or is not good." There is a subtle interplay of object specifica...
Then, as noted in my last, both languages could be right or wrong. There is no necessary contradiction if "good" does not mean the same thing as "????...
Okay. So A=B? I agree one of the cultures is wrong; I agree mere description/assertion does not suffice. Going back to my previous post: If one party ...
I suppose the simple answer is that I think Plato would have been bothered if Aristotle had been his philosophical predecessor. But because Aristotle ...
The first very crucial thing to note is that definitions are also fallible. In order to understand the meaning of a predication, one must understand t...
Okay. So a fairly basic way to overcome the egoist's objection is to recognize that there are common goods, the benefit of which is in our private int...
It's really nothing like your ideas. If the government funding fails then you revert to lower quality, dirt roads, as are already common in countries ...
That doesn't mean they can't be funded otherwise, or that they need to be of the quality you have in mind. Consider: A dirt road where I live handles ...
But they're not, because roads are cheap enough to be built by private parties. Small counties can afford roads but not trains. Where I live many of t...
Okay. You have an expensive idea you want other people to pay for? Nah, I'll just quote it and let it stand there awkwardly: :razz: The problem isn't ...
Maybe it would only stop if there is someone waiting at the stop. And maybe you could pull a cord to alert the engineer that you want to get off at th...
Interesting! Yes, perhaps. But now you have me thinking of boats. Regarding the OP, I don't think countries that were built on cars will be converted ...
Imagine all the unintended evils that would accompany such a thing. :razz: ...I don't find much rigorous argumentation in the OP. It looks like a quic...
I think you are on the right track. You seem to be proffering something akin to virtue ethics. This is a strange interpretation. It seems to me that h...
This seems fairly close. Note that we are talking about pp. 11-13 of the paper. Simpson provides various related definitions on those pages. We could ...
You are quite forward about being unable to define good and bad, and so I am focusing on those. Usually someone who cannot define good or bad does not...
No, the very fact that you revise your ideas and write long posts is evidence that you are not approaching these topics glibly. Okay, so you think goo...
Ah, yes. So the context is abstruse Medieval Christological debates, lol. Of course, I think your question is more general: If my memory serves, a sub...
There are different places where I believe Moore's Open Question has been adequately addressed. One is, "On the Naturalistic Fallacy and St. Thomas," ...
In large part, yes. The difficulty is that when we get to fundamental words and concepts they become more difficult to understand. "Being" is the gran...
Perhaps he might ask, "Are Thrasymachus and I dwelling in the same cave?" But Aristotle addresses Plato's Ideas at various points, including Metaphysi...
It's the same thing, and my point of departure here is @"Hanover"'s interpretation: The issue here is that Hanover (and others) seem to think that usi...
Sure, but what blog are you thinking of? I want to make sure I understand the context of that quote. (Of course Michael is right that the term substan...
I am asking whether you think Banno's claims commit him to essentialism, and secondarily, what you take essentialism to be. Okay thanks, that's clear ...
What's interesting here is that while @"Hanover" is an anti-essentialist and I am an essentialist, it seems to me that we would both agree that your p...
Not this one. --- Added: I mean, I spent a fair bit of time on this in past threads, including the thread containing the honey bee example given above...
Agreed. This is why: interprets Moore's "naturalism" as essentialism. I think the reason people balk at essentialism is because they have imbibed cari...
I think essentialism is a fundamental question. In this case it would simply be resituated as the question of whether the patterns are really in the t...
But I never said it did. Not according to the definition you gave, no. There are equivocal uses of words, yes. I would say that essentialism is more a...
Okay, and I think the meaning of 'essence' has become confused or brittle, so that may be part of the problem. Yes, or at the very least it is what we...
Comments