Metaphysician Undercover

I still think that this expresses a gross misunderstanding of inspiration. An individual living human being, as a composite 'whole", with a multitude ...

Do the ideas exist within the objects that we sense, and we "pick up" the ideas from the things through sensation? Or, are the ideas created in the ac...

I still don't think I agree with you. Suppose someone observes some natural phenomena and creates some ideas concerning these phenomena. In a sense, y...

Don't you think that some people figure out stuff that's new to everyone? What about Einstein's idea about the relativity of simultaneity? Wasn't this...

I disagree. If this were the case, then nothing new could have ever been thought up. But clearly subjects like mathematics demonstrates that all sorts...

I don't see how we have such opposing conclusions. Let me make a simple deductive argument out of your premise concerning active participation, and yo...

Are you serious? I guess not, judging by your use of "lol".

Isn't it clear that learning is not a case of someone simply giving you something. This would make the learner completely passive, when surely the lea...

Sorry, I've jumped ahead a little bit, toward what I consider as the "conclusion" of this part of the text. He discusses very explicitly, the relation...

It's not the case that the thing has only negative properties, it is the case that the things property's are unknown. The thing has been identified, a...

Right, now do you agree that "where something comes form" implies a temporal priority of one thing in relation to the other? And if one is temporally ...

I do not agree with this. To say "X is something other than Y" is not to say something devoid of meaning, as it distinguishes X from Y. I agree that i...

I agree that if they exist through each other, then they may be circular. But what you do not seem to understand is that if this is the case, that the...

A medal is the reward you get for your excellence in misunderstanding logic.

That's not a true circularity. To be a true circle, there can be no difference between point 1,2, and 3, in relation to "point of origin". To be truly...

If time is defined in relation to physical change, then it is necessary for physical change to be occurring in order for time to be passing, hence a u...

This would all depend on how one defines "time".

This is exactly why we need to consider the 0th dimension, a dimension with no space. When we realize that there could be a time without space we need...

Here's a question, a point of interest. Does anyone disagree with what Wittgenstein is arguing, that it is impossible to learn language solely through...

23. But how many kinds of sentence are there? Say assertion, question, and command?—There are countless kinds: countless different kinds of use of wha...

There is a category mistake inherent within this premise. The "way we are" is a passive state, expressed as a static description. It cannot account fo...

I find that to say things like this is to make a statement which simplifies something that is complicated, but it doesn't really make sense. It's like...

The question here though, is how is it that a physical state which is capable of having a mental state is created. If you're comfortable with it, you ...

That's a good question, and it probably depends on what is meant by "irreducible" here. Let's assume a brain state is physical and that a mental state...

I can't agree with this, as I see a fundamental error. If you are talking about circularity then you cannot refer to a "point of origin". This is fund...

I don't agree. The automatic, and instantaneous meaning is one's own meaning, the meaning produced by one's own habituation. It is not the other's mea...

I don't see your point. As Socrates' argument demonstrates, we still need to turn to the "soul" to account for the existence of "brain states". Where'...

I agree, you do not "observe" another person's meaning, you deduce, or infer it. And, you do this through the means of the meaning you produce in your...

Here's a thought experiment. Imagine the colours of a world which existed without any organic matter. There would be some variance of colour, but the ...

I don't recognize this as a very good example, because it attempts to understand something complex through a simple division and analysis. So "five re...

When he says "Slab!", and he means "please bring me a slab", I think: "that fucking asshole is asking me for another fucking slab again, when he hasn'...

Right, you just proved the point I was making. There is no necessity to proceed.

I'm just going by how the word "meaning" is commonly used, and defined in the dictionary. The meaning of a word is what is meant by that word, and wha...

Well, let's say that attributes are properties, so you're asking about the properties of brain states, like harmony is a property of musical notes. If...

Sure, it's not absolutely necessary, and it can go smoothly, but misunderstanding is likely the case. But isn't it necessary to understand what the au...

Yes, people "may" wind up with different things in mind, but to be able to use language successfully we must avoid that. And we do learn to use langua...

If I remember correctly, Socrates dismisses the harmony theory because the soul must necessarily rule over the body, and therefore not be harmony whic...

it's debatable whether Feser is "less spiritual", but what he does do is remove the temporal connotations from the concepts of "potential" and "actual...

I agree. What Valentinus asked for is to cover a large amount of complex and varied material in a short period of time. I nominate I like sushi as "th...

P=P, does not itself need to progress to further axioms. It has meaning on its own, as the law of identity, indicating that P exists and is identifiab...

Right, you've now changed your tune. Before you said "P=P requires -P=-P to exist". Now, P=P is simply incomplete without -P.

Now you're changing your tune. Before you said that P=P requires -P in order to have any meaning. Starting to see things my way now? Now that you're s...

My point is that your ramblings are illogical. And there appears to be group consensus on that.

You mean my point is made. And yours is disproven.

The law of identity leads to the law of non-contradiction, and not vise versa. It's a one way street, like the law of non-contradiction leads to the l...

No, this is incorrect. P=P leads to the conclusion of P cannot equal -P, it does not require it. Do you see the difference? We can say whatever we wan...

Sure, -P=-P is consistent with P=P, and it may be argued that -P=-P follows logically from P=P if P=P represents the law of identity, because -P=-P co...

There is nothing about P=P which requires -P, or implies the existence of -P whatsoever. This is your false assumption.

What exactly is the property dualist concept of mind?

I think this forum has rules against soliciting.