Right, and that whole change is in the past now. I want an example of a change which has no part in the past or in the future. Otherwise we should agr...
By removing the intent from punishment, you remove causation (final cause). This is what you said before: If you remove the intent (final cause), you ...
Do you understand the difference between descriptive laws and prescriptive laws? Descriptive laws such as the laws of physics describe the world as we...
If that's really what you believe, then I challenge you to describe a change which isn't one of the following three: all in the past, all in the futur...
Do you mean that if you were rich you could take the time to study some good philosophy, but since you're not, you settle for bad philosophy? Get the ...
There is nothing illogical about an object having a property at one time, and not having that same property at another time. So we may observe, at one...
The difference between good philosophy and bad philosophy. The good requires two, three, or more readings to understand. The bad you can absorb at dou...
Yeah I see your point. We make the choice first, then the evidence supports whichever belief one chooses. Whichever choice we make, we can use the sam...
Causal relations require a prior and posterior time, a before and after. There is no such before and after at the present unless they are past and fut...
If this were the case, that only the present exists, and only changes which are currently happening exist, then it would be the case that any random t...
Consider a temporal model of the universe. All that we experience is at the present, so spatial existence, existence as we know it, is at the present....
I don't see the analogy. If God is real, then all things are evidence of God. If God is not real, then all things are evidence of not-God. You cannot ...
I think that's pretty obvious. If there is a God, and there are laws which govern the way that natural things behave, then it is God who makes things ...
Forms do not have spatial existence, so your question doesn't make much sense to me. As I said, they are prior to the passing of time, and spatial exi...
What do you mean what sort of ontological item? It is an ontological category itself. Ideas are commonly believed to be a type of form, but not all fo...
Yes, there are particular forms. But if a particular form is given to matter, the temporal nature of matter denies the possibility that this form coul...
Actually, I don't believe there is such a thing as particular material. I think "matter" is purely conceptual, and therefore by nature, a universal, g...
Noses are partially composed of material, but material does not make up the relationships, nor the processes which that material is involved in. These...
We are talking about "what" something is. I am just demonstrating how ridiculous your description of subjective experience, or noses, or whatever, as ...
Some people I would not like them to distrust me, others I don't care if they distrust me. No, I explained this. The fact that one dislikes what anoth...
That's right, "nose" is defined as "an organ above the mouth...". To define "nose" as "particular material, in particular relations, undergoing partic...
What I objected to is you saying that consciousness is particular material, involved in particular relations, and particular processes. Such particula...
"Evidence" is a word which needs to be properly understood. It refers to facts which support a belief. So to refer to any facts as "evidence" requires...
Of course material things can be qualitatively identical, it's the identity which is immaterial, not the thing itself. That's the difference between n...
Say you have two distinct material entities. What's to say that they are similar except a mind making that judgement? You might say "they just are sim...
You seem to be missing the point Terrapin. I believe that Joe's subjective experience is similar to Pete's. And, according to this similarity, we can ...
Not for me they are not the same. These named things are the result, or consequence of holding one responsible. Responsible means that one is accounta...
If "4" refers to something, and "2" refers to something different, then it is impossible that "2+2" refers to the same thing as "4". It doesn't make s...
Here's a problem you might want to consider. There are many theists who think that not believing in God (atheism) is the greatest evil, the root of al...
That's not true. "4" has its own reference, "2" has its own reference, and "+" also has its own reference. Therefore it is false to say that "2+2" and...
I wouldn't say that a final cause is necessarily not itself caused, because it could be caused by another final cause. One thing may be done for the s...
The accepted distinction, which I know of, is the distinction between numerical identity and qualitative identity. Numerical identity means the same, ...
Numerically identical means one and the same. Clearly 2+2 is distinct from 4, so they are not numerically identical. They are however equivalent, mean...
They do not reference the same entity though. 2+2 signifies two distinct entities each with the value of two. Those two distinct entities, with the va...
Holding one responsible means to recognize the individual as a cause. It may entail many things, blame, praise, judgement of guilt, trust, distrust, e...
Your view is extremely bizarre. I've never heard "equal" used to signify that two entities are the same entity. That idea is simply contradictory. If ...
The point is that a person is considered to be the cause of one's actions. If one were not the cause of one's actions we could not hold the person res...
Correct, "=" signifies "equals", or "is equivalent to", the two are synonymous. Do you have difficulty with the English language? Back to my question....
Exactly, that's why the concept of efficient cause quite easily leads one into determinism. We only escape determinism by assuming that there are thin...
You said: Don't you think that "type" refers to something? You do philosophy without differentiating between identical and equivalent? The former is t...
Yes, if you read that passage in his "Physics", that is what he says, that he is distinguishing the different ways that "cause" is used. As I said bef...
The necessity is found in the relationship between the cause and the effect. In order to say that striking with the hammer was the cause of the nail b...
Comments