I told you, evidence comes up at a later time which makes you see that you made a mistake. If anyone else can judge you at a later time, by reviewing ...
Similar use of deception has been used by police forces to capture criminals in the US for some time now. They say that the person has won a lottery a...
Then I think I would agree. But I go even further to say that when we identify a thing as a particular, it is not strictly the "the seeing of particul...
This would be an error of misinterpretation then. Either the situation is not interpreted properly, or the rule is not interpreted properly. So the ru...
No, not "generalizing of identities" the contrary of this. We must refer to the law of identity itself. The law of identity recognizes the identity of...
That's how mistake is possible. One problem of mistake is as Srap indicates. The rule is relegated to memory, and we act most times by habit without c...
You know I disagree. You've described two distinct things here, and conflated them as one. Realizing that we are separate is one thing, and realizing ...
I don't see any argument there. Since we can and do communicate without definitions, your talk of definitions is irrelevant. Definitions are not a req...
Yeah, that makes sense to me. Now consider this. Anytime that we describe what is, it is always based in abstraction, and the abstraction is produced ...
How does a person talking to you in such a way, produce a need to recognize the pre-existence of that person? I would think that the desire to recogni...
That, at 202 is the premise, the definition of "obeying a rule" which allows for the private language argument. As you can see, it's very clearly stat...
I don't see this as logical. The person distinguishes itself from all that is other than itself. Why does the person need to consider the pre-existenc...
My claim is not that we must conclude that any given thinker is not following a rule. It is that if a rule cannot be identified from the person's acti...
It's simple logic. In order that they are different, there must be a difference. The difference is the reason why they are different. That they are no...
Whether or not the reasons are known is irrelevant to the principle of sufficient reason which just states that there is a reason. Whether or not the ...
The differentiation need not be a differentiation from other individuals. It might only be a differentiation between oneself and what is other. So if ...
I don't see how this is relevant. Oh, so you don't "completely go along with" it. Then why not give it up as unacceptable? Why gloss over the unaccept...
I was talking about the logical relation between one and many, which I explained. You still haven't gone back to address how it is possible that we, i...
I don't know Freud very well but I know that a lot of his principles are debatable, if not completely discredited. This is surely wrong. A baby has th...
I follow rules all the time, don't you? I hold a principle within my mind and adhere to it. There is no "god-like insight" involved in me knowing this...
But that doesn't mean that what makes a person a person is the caregiver. A human being cannot survive without food either, but this doesn't mean that...
So you've gone from a vicious circle to an infinite regress. Each person requires parents, ad infinitum. Do you believe that there was an infinite num...
This would actually defy the law of identity. If a thing is identifiable as one thing, then there is a reason why it is that thing and not another thi...
Isn't this a vicious circle? Don't you need to be conscious to be able to study what others are doing? So you seem to imply that one must already be c...
Sure, Wittgenstein found his description of "rule-following" adequate for his purposes, and perhaps these other philosophers found it adequate for the...
Wittgenstein did not provide an adequate description of what it means to follow a rule. He stated that if one could be observed to be acting in a part...
There is a sense of the word "true" which is consistent with this description of philosophy. This meaning is along the lines of genuine, right, honest...
Good, you recognize your mistake then, when you said that a point is an edge to a line. That's a start. What? Why contradict yourself? That's the end ...
I never said a point is the edge of a line. Your putting words in my mouth. An edge marks the boundary of a region, a point marks the boundary of a li...
Neither can a point have an edge, nor can a circle be made up of straight lines. So this idea is contradictory in two ways. A point marks the limit to...
Thanks Srap. This is really the difference between continuity and discrete points. You could construct a circle with points equidistant from a centre ...
A circle, because it has no beginning nor end, is the very same thing as an infinite regress. The circle cannot limit the number of sides to a polygon...
My claim is that all those moves which in math are universally considered to be invalid, are based in ontological principles. The principles of additi...
I don't think complete consensus is ever possible in mathematics until the complete nature of reality is completely understood by everyone. Then every...
There is a very real need for serving in your own land, as we need a rapid response to natural disasters, terrorism, and other possible problems which...
This is the important first choice of applying mathematics, right here, the defining of "individuation". If we assume that the multitude, the many, or...
I think that the premise of B&C is a little inaccurate with (1). The basis of the number system, and the foundation for Pythagorean idealism and Plato...
We have numerous choices as to what zero actually represents, and this is evident if we start to look at the difference between the different represen...
Are you familiar with the method of Platonic dialectics? Sometimes we have an idea of what a word ought to mean, how it ought to be used, and this pre...
That's exactly what I think. That's why when people are talking about the fair share, in respect to military expenditure, they are not talking about h...
You might say that "certain" is redundant here. But redundancy is useful to emphasize something to add strength to the statement. The utility of the w...
I agree that you and are "we". I just don't like it when "we" becomes us, as opposed to them, when others do not agree with what we agree to. It's har...
Right, so knowing what is impossible requires knowing the circumstances. The circumstances dictate what is impossible, and knowing what is impossible ...
I don't think this is the case, so long as we stick to customary definitions when determining logical impossibilities. We describe physical things wit...
My point is that in the phrase "it is certain", "is certain" is not attitudinal. Is this not obvious to you? You appear to have proceeded with faulty ...
The problem I see is this. "Communism" was presented to the American people by the government and media, many years ago, as a threat to the freedom an...
This attitude of "we" is the deceptive attitude. "We" is ambiguous, as no individual is necessarily in or out. The "we" is synonymous with "us", and t...
What's the point in doing philosophy in that way; where instead of changing your theory to fit the evidence, you deny the evidence which is inconsiste...
We're not talking about the meaning of "certain". We are talking about the meaning of "certainty". "Certainty" means "it is certain" rather than "I am...
Comments