Relativist

No. I'm pointing out that because decision making is consistent with determinism (and thus, the PSR)- there is no basis for insisting we have libertar...

If I decide not eat cookies (a "should"), this decision establishes a disposition- a factor that will influence, but not necessitate, my future behavi...

There are no absurd conclusions at all. It doesn't trivialize modal reasoning, because we can still conceptualize how things might have been in counte...

I continue to take issue with the notion that "modal collapse" must be avoided. I believe that modal collapse translates to necessitarianism in ontolo...

We're discussing possibility/impossibility of a state of affairs, not the computability. That conflates textbook laws of physics with ontological laws...

It's determined by the set of physical steps that led to the existence of the solar system. Each step is necessitated by laws of nature. Laws of natur...

I agree that IF libertarian free will exists, then it is a source of contingency. Would you agree that IF quantum collapse is indeterminate, the it is...

Point 2 defined the ontological basis for contingeny, and it is critical. I referred to quantum collapse only to illustrate how to apply the contingen...

No. It's an implication of mistrusting our basic instincts, our senses and our cognitive structure. If those are denied, no beliefs can be justified- ...

I'm just suggesting that we innately believe (intuitively, not deductively or verbally) there is an external world. Classifying it as physical, materi...

No. IMO, that obfuscates the ontology. I did not assert the OG exists necessarily as a premise. Rather, it's necessity follows from my ontological acc...

Several issues. 1. An OG exists autonomously. This means without dependencies of any kind (causal or otherwise). If it had such a dependency it could ...

I'm referring to metaphysical necessity/possibility, which pertains to existence. Logical possibility pertains to the semantics of logic. Conceptual p...

Yes, but how does this differ from confirmation bia?

Correct: I think time is mind-independent. From my point of view, calling it "real" is vague. My best guess would be that it's a relation between even...

Yes, of course there's a number of presuppositions - it's a complete metaphysical system. As I keep telling you, the outline of the system (state of a...

I agree that space and times are conditions of appearance, and the framework within which objects appear to us (through our senses), and establishes t...

So...your view is that space and time are entirely mind-dependent. Is this a premise, or can you provide reasoning that entails this? Needless to say,...

That's logically impossible. There can be no explanation for an OG. It must exist autonomously - not dependent on anything else. But since the OG is n...

Of course, but it's rational to maintain a belief before it's disproven, and its irrational to reject something just because it's logically possible t...

Sure. It seems to conflate the object (the existent that we naturally believe we are perceiving) with the perception of the object. It's perfectly fin...

Tautologies are statements that are necessarily true. The term doesn't apply to existents, like an OG. The question is whether or not there is an onto...

Aren't ALL lies (intentional falsehoods) immoral?

So...you're saying fraud and defamation are perfectly fine, because the freedom of speech trumps them.

I had in mind saying a few of the things you discussed , but you said it all. I brought the issue of fraud and libel to NOS4A2 in another thread, and ...

You haven't provided an overall metaphysical framework. When I asked, you said: "As to whether I advocate a metaphysics, it’s a notoriously difficult ...

Here's where I explained it to Wayfarer: This is unarguably true, but it doesn't imply the framework represents a false account. Consistent with evolu...

Science relies on abductive reasoning , which is a general epistemological approach- not exclusive to science. It's explicitly used by historians, and...

I disagree with your conclusion. That's because a natural OG, which includes the laws of nature in its structure, would exist necessarily. It's logica...

Yes: OG = ontological ground. I don't need to demonstrate there is an OG to someone who already believes there is one.

Because he's a Christian, he believes there is an OG. I am arguing that an OG does not entail a God. Can you show that there is no OG?

Can we agree there's a first cause and an irreducible bottom layer of reality? If we start with that assumption - and call it the "ontolgoical ground"...

Yes, but I'm not doing that. Metaphysical naturalism (MN) provides a metaphysical context for what we know about the world. Of course, any metaphysica...

Agreed: it's a construct and a model. But does the model reflect truth, at least in part? Is its truth not possible? Unlikely? Untrustworthy? Is there...

I agree. I've referred to this as innate, basic beliefs that are nonverbal. Arguably, these beliefs are PROPERLY basic: a product of the world as it i...

I agree language helps shape how we think about the world, I think there's something more basic in us that is pre-verbal. No one has to be taught ther...

Appeal? It's an inference. I believe the past is finite, which implies an initial state which exists by brute fact. Likewise, I believe there is a "bo...

The statement of my you refer to was discussing a physicalist point of view, and acknowledging that perceptions are not identical to reality (what is ...

There were no sensations in the universe before life came into being. This seems to entail abandoning our innate sense of a world external to ourselve...

How do they justify believing this? Physicalism is epistemically grounded in our perceptions of the world - presumably our senses deliver us a reflect...

Glad you don't mean to do away with language, but this "casual usage" is pertinent to a very practical (and seemingly successful) means of interacting...

Yes, but there is a physical relationship present that exists irrespective of us putting it into intelligible terms.

Yes, it's a definition of force, but it also identifies a physical relationship among force, mass, and acceleration- so it is predictive.

Fair enough - it's presupposition, but it is POSSIBLY true. By contrast, we agree that mere description (equations) is not causitive - that's not even...

I agree, but what does the equation describe? It describes some aspect of reality (if it's true). Personally, I lean toward law realism: there exist l...

I don't understand what you're saying. Reified? That entails a fallacy. Do you mean actualized? Under QM, a pure state quantum system evolves determin...

Here's what I was thinking. The things that lack explanations, are brute facts. So we should always seek explanations, but accept that there are insta...

If only SOME things have explanations, then there's not much impetus to seek one. Where I wanted to go with this, is to narrow down the sorts of thing...

So some things have explanations. Seems so weak, it's irrelevant.

The PSR can be considered the underpinning of science: the pursuit of answers to why something is the way it is. So I think there's something worth sa...