You criticized me for interpretations of Wittgenstein which are "far from the norm". Aren't we discussing private language? As you say here, in regard...
The soul does have separate parts, that is well explained by Aristotle. That is why one soul has many different powers, what we might call different f...
That's a very good passage, and the sick man's tongue being affected by a bitter humour, is very similar to the tinted glass analogy which I think you...
Of course the rational power is specific to human beings. It is that way by definition. We have no disagreement with this. What I said is that the rat...
Sorry to be blunt Wayfarer, but I don't think you've read the material. If so you wouldn't be saying "the rational soul is a power", you'd be saying t...
:up: And Sam26 says my interpretations of Wittgenstein are "so far from the norm". What Sam refuses to accept, is that when we are talking "private la...
I don't understand what you're saying here. Could you explain? These are not called "three types of soul" by Aristotle. This is clearly a misreading, ...
I've read "On the Soul" a number of times. Book two starts with a definition of "soul". "That is why the soul is the first grade of actuality of a nat...
I think that the reliability of this sort of method is doubtful. There may be a larger context which determines a left or right rotation which we are ...
You're not seeing the big picture Wayfarer. "Human being" is a classification of animal defined as "rational animal". Therefore all human beings are a...
Go for it baker, it sounds like Baden has challenged you. Express your hatred, maybe you'll get banned, and maybe not. It seems kinda like Russian rou...
Look closely at what Aristotle is saying here. These are called "powers" of the soul. They are not distinct souls, or degrees of soul, but capacities ...
I never heard that one from Dr. Feynman. He was a good joker though. There might be some truth to this. If the right and left of the observer transpos...
It's not a definition of "soul" which I would accept. I really try to steer away from online dictionaries, especially for philosophical purposes they'...
You can't, that's the point, "right and left" requires context. Ok. let's take this one step at a time Hyper. There is a built in front and back, and ...
I think you misunderstand classical philosophy if you do not apprehend this as a radical division. It is the division represented by Kant as the disti...
Thanks for your efforts to explain these things to me. Think about it, if you have no location, you cannot have any right or left side. To have a righ...
I believe it is the soul itself which is the incorporeal element. And this is the same for all living things. This is the Aristotelian structure. Then...
We've been through this already Wayfarer, and I've provided the reference. Also, I explained to you how I understood this issue in a way very similar ...
It occurs to me, that only a bot could do that in just a few days. What does this mean, to produce a reflection of a vector? You refer to a "mirror", ...
Well, this is where we disagree then. I do not see an "at the root" difference between human beings and other mammals. I think the fact that they are ...
We can accept the observed facts of evolution without accepting the hypothetical postulate as to what constitutes "advantageous". I'm sure you can see...
I don't see why you are so averse to the idea that reason is the product of an evolved brain. This idea is consistent with most classical religions, a...
Such proofs are dependent on the axioms. And the axioms are not independent of the subjects. This is the position put forward by Hegel's dialectics. B...
The point though, is that it's not really true that the right side of your body is a duplication of the left. A look at a representation of a brain wi...
It only seems that way to those who ignore the fact that numerals signify values. You think that numerals signify some type of Platonic object, called...
I don't get your point. But a mirror's surface is not a true 2D plane. Look at it under a microscope, and you'll see this. So I don't see how you can ...
What you are demonstrating is that the set {///} has the value signified by 3. Do you not accept the fact that mathematics works with values? If "{///...
No equivocation. A value is the estimated worth of a thing, whether the principle of estimation is numerical (providing the basis for quantity), or th...
These two are very different. The imaginary plane and lines you describe are imaginary and may be positioned arbitrarily. The mirror is a real (though...
The symbols "2" and "4" signify numbers, and numbers are quantitative values. In its simplest form, a number is the value assigned to a group of thing...
Simplicity, I suppose. The object and the image are on opposites sides of the plane. And the reality of the turning required such that they face each ...
What is often missed, is that mathematics itself is a value structure, and is therefore dependent on, and based in "value judgement". What has occurre...
A reflection, or mirror image, is not identical to the thing reflected. Notice that when you look into the mirror, the features on the right side of y...
How do you know this? Thanks for the detailed and informative post. Regardless of whether you are a bot or not, I find your posting to be both interes...
Yes I agree, the older notion of symmetry does not involve removing the symmetrical thing from its context. In fact it might be argued that the reason...
Thanks for your contribution Agent Tangerine. I must admit that I don't quite grasp what you're talking about here. I'm having a difficult time unders...
You might call my reading "uncharitable", but I simply do not understand how you can propose an ethics which proposes to give priority to all natural ...
It's no wonder you can't discuss philosophy with me, you refuse to accept the points that Wittgenstein makes, which I point out to you, insisting that...
We've got Agent Smith, and now Agent Tangerine. Where's Agent Bruce? That's the problem though, how can a thing be rotated like that (a force being re...
Clearly it is indicated by Wittgenstein that it is not necessary that there is something which the description refers to. So you seem to ignore this p...
Notice how you've moved from "object and designation" here, toward "description". These two are fundamentally different types of language use which ca...
The point is not whether a thing would maintain one, or even some, of its qualities, when being moved, that is not the sense of "symmetry" I am talkin...
Sorry for the misunderstanding. But now the sentence appears incoherent to me. Obviously what is good for some species is not good for other species. ...
Comments