J

I have a different interpretation of this passage. Kant is talking about the distinction between negative judgments “which are such not merely as rega...

I don’t think Bob Ross meant that the experiences we have are necessarily veridical. Nor does this question have anything to do with our more sophisti...

This is very clear and helpful. I’ll let Leontiskos pursue the evolutionary biology question, but I want to raise a problem concerning the more common...

This nicely captures the problem. I agree that the recasting doesn’t ask us to create any “rational space” between understanding and believing. So my ...

Just to pick up this thread for a moment: The unease I was describing above has to do with whether it makes sense to use "ought" in this way. You've p...

Possibly I just misunderstood; I thought you had confused two kinds of indifferent people. The first kind, Ms. Nihil, can tell the difference but does...

There's a lot of good stuff here and I probably need to reply piece by piece, as this week is starting to get the better of me. So, to begin: Yes, and...

Yes, but. I tried to walk a fine line in the OP. I was trying to put the idea “There ought to be consensus based on rational argumentation” in bracket...

@"Leontiskos" Thanks, that helps. You’ve raised some complex and difficult issues here. Maybe the best point of entry is the beginning of your paragra...

Glad you like the thread. “Ambitious” is being kind! Your perspective here is a timely corrective. We don’t talk past each other and disagree about ab...

@"Gnomon" I agree with most all of this, especially the humility part. I would only clarify that "being in possession of all truth," as Franklin put i...

I think I understand this, but hope you'll say more. Tell me if this is close: One possible premise for a philosophical argument is "Philosophical arg...

Again, I may be at fault here for not explaining precisely what the problem situation is. No one – not me, not Habermas, not Rehg – believes that any ...

I’ve met many such people, interested only in confirming what they’re already sure of. Socrates met a lot of them too! I hope it doesn’t characterize ...

By all means, please share your thoughts on how rhetoric might enter the story here. In the OP I tried to sharpen the question about rationality in or...

@"Janus" I think this is what Rehg is getting at when he talks about the difference between “cogent argumentation” and “logical deduction,” in the quo...

One of the responses to this problem that I like best is the line that stretches from Dewey through Rawls and describes a broadly liberal-democratic, ...

And so do I. I was doing my impersonation of a disappointed post-modernist, trying to give voice to a common critique of Western phil. My own view is ...

I thought about pointing out that the very problem I was raising was, of course, subject to the problem! But I decided it would be better to let that ...

Yes, and the question Habermas and Rehg want to press is: Is that all we can say? Is that the end of the story? Is rational consensus impossible? Are ...

These are good questions, and need to be taken separately. Philosophical disagreement can be a "problem" in two senses. First, it can puzzle and distr...

Well, I don't really identify philosophy with rationality, since many of the post-modern critics I have in mind are extremely dubious about such an eq...

There are many interesting and insightful things in your post that I'd like to respond to, but I have to confess my almost complete ignorance of Thomi...

@"Pantagruel". I see, thanks. I thought you meant there was a specific connection between Nagel's position on logical truth (to understand is to belie...

That's interesting. Could you say more about it?

This was a question about how to view a statement like "You ought to believe a sound argument" -- what sort of "ought" do we have in mind here? The tw...

I also admire T. Nagel, and recommend his The View from Nowhere and The Last Word as superb, challenging presentations of some of these themes. Leonti...

I think we have to add a "3rd self," namely the unconscious self. As the distinction between subject-experience and content-experience makes clear, th...

Yes, important questions. Bernstein’s magnum opus, Beyond Objectivism and Relativism, addresses them in full, though it was an “inquiry in progress” a...

Indeed it is, but I think we need to be careful not to stipulate a usage that goes too far afield from ordinary discourse. (Otherwise, why not coin a ...

Thanks for the link to the final video. Yes, the videographer (I believe his name is Nathan Hohipuha?) argues that we need to understand "object" as a...

I think your caveat -- "apart from animal knowledge" -- illustrates the problem of identifying knowledge per se with human knowledge. There would also...

One of Bernstein’s concerns that interests me on this topic: What happens to liberal-democratic values (including the value of political discussion am...

I haven’t read Harman, though I’m interested to do so now. The video was perhaps not as enlightening as it might have been, so take what I’m going to ...

(This is my first post – thanks for welcoming me to the forum!) Reading this thread, I was reminded of an insight from Richard J. Bernstein in his ess...