This goes back to Sam26's claim that hinge-propositions (I'll just refer to them as "some rules") ought not be doubted, because they are necessary. If...
No I didn't say that DNA gives direction, I said that the physical parts of the living body are directed. DNA is a physical part, and therefore It fol...
I don't see your point. I agree that to play such games you must follow the existing rules. My point is that in language and knowledge we do not need ...
Right, if the rules are created by human beings, then human beings do not have to follow any existing rules because they create the rules which they f...
You are losing me with your terminology. Let's see if we can straighten some things out. These terms, biology, biochemistry, chemistry, and physics, a...
The point is, as I stated earlier, that we in general, do not have a good clear idea of what it means to exist. Therefore doubt concerning claims of e...
Yes, and they perform directed actions. And it is not understood exactly why they perform directed actions. My point is that there is no living body w...
I went through this Banno, I told you your "game of chess" analogy is not applicable. That's when you accused me of being disrespectful. The game of c...
The argument has been that it is unreasonable to doubt specific fundamental propositions. This implies that these propositions cannot be reasonably do...
I'm saying that leaves have no existence independent from the tree. The fact that they fall to the ground does not negate their dependency on the tree...
DNA is made up of smaller parts which themselves carry out directed activity. Biologist have not found the bottom. Why don't you address the logic of ...
Yes, now the identified object is the person, the person exists. The hands are not identifiable as distinct particular objects, they are identified as...
This is exactly what I pointed out to you, that if you insist that we must follow the rules, in the case of language and knowledge, instead of freely ...
Actually this is the point. Existence is given to the object, it is what we assume individual, particular objects have, existence. We describe objects...
I came to learn this from my study of philosophy, many years of reading. It is a difficult subject requiring much study. Here's something to consider ...
When you demonstrate that animals other than human beings understand abstract facts, then we might proceed in this direction. Regardless though, this ...
Fine, I'd offer an apology if you could demonstrate the disrespect. I'm very accustomed to your tact at avoidance of the issues, and that's all I see ...
An important thing to note, I think, is that Socrates ends the Theaetetus with an explanation that they've actually been looking for the wrong thing. ...
Remember Kwalish Kid at philosophyforums.com? When I fist engaged with him I really frustrated him. He said I can't quite place you, you're not like a...
Your chess game comparison is not a good analogy. We are discussing knowledge here, and knowledge is a changing, evolving, progressive object. Contrar...
I don't see the contradiction. I have no reason to doubt that the bishop moves only diagonally because I know the rules. But this does not mean that t...
The will is the cause of our free choices. It's free from the temporal existence which we know of as the chain of causation, because it is immaterial,...
Certainty is an ideal, just like justified true belief is an ideal. There is nothing wrong with assuming ideals though, they can be very useful, like ...
The point with free will though, is that the particular choice is not caused by any desire, it is caused by the will, which is free from that chain of...
I don't agree with this principle. That's Platonic Realism and I do not agree with it. I believe in an ever changing world where human beings have fre...
That depends on how you define "certainty". As I said I associate doubt with ambiguity. Do you distinguish "certainty" from "certitude"? If so, then w...
That is exactly why I deny that universal forms have any real independent existence, it becomes contradictory in the way that you describe here. The i...
The issue is linguistic right from the start. The skeptic's point is that we do not know what the word "existence" means, to the extent that we can ju...
There is a big problem with this definition. "The way things are", refers to a moment of time at the present. But time is passing, and things are chan...
So this is the issue right here, the difference between free will and determinism. The determinist sees things in the future as necessary because they...
Of course. Absolute certainty is impossible, and the request for absolute certainty becomes circular as it revolves around a requirement for the impos...
I didn't say that you ought to doubt every statement. I said that every statement is inherently doubtable, that is the nature of statements in general...
I see these other different ways, and I accept them. Sam's way of seeing things is not incompatible with mine they are actually very similar. The prob...
A "fact" is a thing known to have occurred, and this implies a knower. What makes you think that there was a knower before there was animals with spee...
Do you recognize that things of the past (whether or not they've been observed or recorded), have a fixed, determined existence, i.e., that they canno...
I don't see how there could be a fact without a statement as to what that fact is. What is an "if-then fact" without the "if" and the "then". It doesn...
I agree, but we generally all take what we say seriously, though we tend to lighten things up now and then with jokes. For some reason though, if some...
Thanks for the reassurance. I was pretty sure that it was meant solely as a joke, but it would have been very poor etiquette for me to have laughed if...
Don't you see this as a big problem for any epistemology? What "justify" means for me is completely different from what it means for you. Isn't it abs...
You agreed with me that our descriptions of the universals are imperfect. You have your description, I have my description, and there are differences ...
You've described the world as consisting of statements of fact (if-then facts). I don't think that the world consists of statements. I think that a st...
Take a look at what you're saying with these examples. "The orange juice is sweet". You've tasted the orange juice, but you've given no indication tha...
I don't see how this is a metaphysical statement. You have stated that you are incapable of proving something. Oh now I remember, I couldn't make sens...
As far as I can tell, my intellect and society present me with choices, they do not present me with needs. My physical body presents me with needs and...
I do not believe that one can justify a belief simply by referring to sensory experience. This is because "to justify" means to demonstrate or prove s...
Actually, I think that all metaphysics is by definition speculative, so I don't know what you're talking about here. I haven't seen your proposal, but...
But you defined "free" with "responsible". If your will is responsible for your actions, then your will is free. Accordingly, a person (or one's will)...
You can say it like that if you want, that in talking about the will being free, you're tacitly implying a libertarian definition, but I don't see it ...
I find that to be a very odd set of definitions. Each of us has a will, and our wills may or may not be the cause of our actions. If the will is the c...
Comments