Metaphysician Undercover

I think the talk of a "brain state" is somewhat misleading. "State" implies static, but the brain is continuously active. Ideas, beliefs, and concepts...

I'm not saying that everything is in the mind, just that truth is in the mind. Truth is what defines the terms. It is true that a square is an equilat...

Where our language fails us is where the metaphysical inquiry starts. In other words, the metaphysician will seek the areas of language use where the ...

I think unenlightened has the right approach here. I believe the "scientific" status of psychology is highly suspect. The scientific method verifies t...

No, I think they are distinct, as per dualism. "All the possible forms of organisation" is a mental construct, conceptual only, whereas "the actual" r...

Why do you think one would be a subset of the other, instead of being completely different, mutually exclusive, categories? I would think that if a po...

I think that "knowing" implies correct judgement, because "truth" requires that a statement be interpreted, and judged as corresponding with reality. ...

So here's the point Ciceronianus. There are laws, that's a fact. There are human actions, and that's a fact as well. These are two very distinct thing...

But the reality of "truth" as "no reality at all" is not my bottom line. The bottom line is that the reality of truth, is that truth is entirely withi...

This is your answer right here: drop out of the work force. Remember your hippy mantra, turn on, tune in, drop out. You've already turned on and tuned...

You seem to be missing the point. The question is whether the thing is "a tree" without being named as a tree. Since "tree" is only the name that we c...

No, what I am arguing is that in order for it to be true that a particular individual is a criminal, that person's actions must have been judged as be...

How does introducing a counterfactual condition explain how the person is "in fact guilty"? The point of my example is that the person's actions have ...

You should clarify your statement. Physics does not attest to a time in the universe when life was not possible. This is not physics, but speculative ...

The evidence is that life did not physically exist on earth. How do you know that life did not come from somewhere other than earth?

OK, let's see if we can clarify the difference between us. I think we both agree that what is "true", is true by assumption. That's what you say in 1)...

Do you perceive the earth as a flat disc? Did someone put a clock at the centre of the earth?

I say let's break out the old turntable and test this.

That there was a time on earth when there was no life, prior to the time that there was life, is not evidence that life developed from non-life. That ...

It's definitely "end of the world", but I wouldn't call it cataclysm. It's for the good.

OK, then to maintain consistency with your beliefs I will not refer to "the law", I will refer to "the laws". We could digress into a discussion of th...

OK, so this implies that you believe that you yourself are better able to decide what you should and shouldn't do, with respect to ethical decisions, ...

Why would you assume that life developed from non-life? Don't you agree that there doesn't seem to be any evidence to support this assumption? If we d...

Now you've changed the subject, talking about people rather than the law. I don't think I've ever met a person whom I don't have respect for. But how ...

What I think tim wood, is that we need to distinguish between true and justified. Modern epistemology clearly assumes a distinction between these two,...

I don't see how this follows, logically. If a person has no respect for a particular law, how can that person have respect for "the laws in general"? ...

That definition doesn't support your claimed usage. First, it qualifies "illegal", later in the sentence as "something bad", and second, even if it ju...

What I'm asking is how is it possible that the person who was found not-guilty by the court is "in fact guilty"? By whose judgement is that person gui...

The described scenario is that many people are aware that a crime was committed, because of the evidence. So the deduction is that there is a person r...

I'm not so sure about this because neither of us has provided any formal definition of "subject matter". Now your definition of "truth" requires "subj...

If the semiosis which creates the tornado is external to the tornado itself, then it doesn't fulfill the conditions of "living", which I described ear...

What you described though is "... that the accused themself makes this judgement. So a person is 'in fact guilty' if the person recalls having committ...

That's what I disagree with, and I think is unreasonable metaphysics. I think there is no reason to believe that physical systems, which are commonly ...

Yes I mentioned this possibility in my reply to Cicero, you can see it in the quote above. This would be what I called a subjective feeling of guilt. ...

I can very easily put my finger on why a tornado is inanimate, it is not living. And if you want me to detail the reasons why I say it is not living, ...

My question was, what do you refer to when you say that the person "may in fact be guilty" when the court has determined that the person is not guilty...

I already gave my definition of inanimate, it means not-living. You don't understand, because you see everything in terms dichotomy, so from your pers...

I really don't want to be the one to spoil the celebration, but I think that blowing oneself to bits with a shotgun is the exact opposite of "dignity"...

No, that's not true. You ought to make yourself more clear. What you asked of me was to define "inanimate". That I did. Now you add a subject, which i...

I follow Aristotle's description which is mostly accepted by modern biology. Life is defined by the potencies of the living being, from the simplest, ...

If it started with a big bang I suppose it ought to end with a big whimper, one being opposed to the other.

There's a book by a German forester Peter Wohlleben, called "The Hidden Life of Trees". It's quite interesting, with reference to numerous scientific ...

Yes, it's very telling. It tells me that you are being obstinate. I just told you, inanimate means not-living. What more are you asking for? I'll repe...

It's not a living thing. Inanimate means not living. You could, if you want, say that the tornado is animate by some other definition of "animate", bu...

It's no problem for me. I accept change as real. I expect that all my acquaintances will be different each time I meet them. This helps me in my effor...

That I couldn't describe the difference between animate and inanimate, in a way which would be acceptable to you, doesn't ,mean that there isn't such ...

Rastafari! But we smoke ganja with you whitey and everything be irie.

But you attribute to the inanimate universe, properties which only living beings are known to have, things like mind, intention, and habits. I'd call ...

I think time is very relevant. The reason why one side of the tree is a different perspective from the other side of the tree, as stated in the op, is...

He's looking at the photographer.