You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Terrapin Station

Comments

How would we arrive at the idea that in order for meaning to be meaning, it can't change. It it's changing meaning, it's not meaning at all?
May 07, 2019 at 22:21
Once again, this is a simple confusion. "Redness" (or the property of being red) is NOT IDENTICAL to the experience of red(ness). So it's quite silly ...
May 07, 2019 at 22:20
Re this, let's clarify how you're using "senseless" there. Is it basically just a value statement?
May 07, 2019 at 22:15
Okay, so moving on, we already answered this. They are non-identical instances of the phrases. Maybe it's not clear what you're asking, though. What s...
May 07, 2019 at 22:12
Then just ask that. Asking "what makes x and y identical" seems like you're asking for some sort of explanation of how it would work ontologically tha...
May 07, 2019 at 22:09
Your responses to this do not bode well for you wanting an editor, by the way. You won't even fix something simple that makes no sense as conventional...
May 07, 2019 at 22:01
Could you give a reference for anything like "<past participle> to that their own" occurring in logic?
May 07, 2019 at 21:58
I don't know how that question makes sense to you, really. In the first case we're naming two separate things ontologically. In the second case, we're...
May 07, 2019 at 21:56
Light refraction is something we're naming "color." I'm not saying that it's the same as the experience of color. I'm saying exactly the opposite of t...
May 07, 2019 at 21:47
It makes no sense in conventional English. "<Past participle> to that their own" makes no sense in conventional English.
May 07, 2019 at 21:41
So when you ask "And you wouldn’t answer in what sense you thought light refraction was the same as colour," you're asking me to say, "sight," "smell,...
May 07, 2019 at 21:38
Where in the world are you getting that idea from?
May 07, 2019 at 21:31
With respect to this, I said this and you ignored it, which is why it went no further. You can't ignore it, then: "The question makes no sense. Are yo...
May 07, 2019 at 21:27
Didn't we just go back and forth for a ridiculous length of time with me explaining that the experience of a color is not the same thing as the color?
May 07, 2019 at 21:22
Is an experience of a color the same thing as the color?
May 07, 2019 at 21:21
Is English your first language?
May 07, 2019 at 21:19
Why would we be supposing that the experience or the brain phenomena are red?
May 07, 2019 at 21:17
From where are we getting "the signals and the experience are the same"?
May 07, 2019 at 21:15
"Predisposed to that their own presuppositions"?
May 07, 2019 at 21:14
That would amount to not understanding the common sense of the term that I just described.
May 07, 2019 at 21:07
Before you post something, read it out loud. Does that sentence make sense to you when you read it out loud?
May 07, 2019 at 21:06
Right. Because we understand that the experience of a color is not identical to the color, right?
May 07, 2019 at 21:04
Didn't I just explain over and over that the experience of a color is not the same thing as the color? So we'd not think that the experience of a colo...
May 07, 2019 at 21:02
They don't have experiences based on those brain phenomena. They have experiences which are identical to those brain phenomena. The experiences are wh...
May 07, 2019 at 20:50
The experience of color, and all mental phenomena, are identical to brain phenomena. Or are you asking for something like the schematics of exactly wh...
May 07, 2019 at 20:45
I'm not saying anything using the phrase "material basis" for one. The light refraction is color. The experience of color is different than light refr...
May 07, 2019 at 20:24
The question makes no sense. Are you thinking that the only senses there are of anything are experienced senses?
May 07, 2019 at 20:12
Why would you equate anything with the experience of that thing? That's such a ridiculous approach, to figure that everything is identical to the the ...
May 07, 2019 at 20:07
It's not "corresponding to the color red," it is the color red. That's not to say that it's the experience of the color red if no one is experiencing ...
May 07, 2019 at 20:03
It is itself color. Color is not identical to the experience of color. You're conflating color (in general) and the experience of color. It's like I'm...
May 07, 2019 at 19:55
First off, where did I write anything even remotely resembling that? Where did I write anything at all like the phrase "material basis" even?
May 07, 2019 at 19:51
Which is you conflating color with the experience of color. I'm not conflating color with the experience of color.
May 07, 2019 at 19:45
If I'm telling you that the experience and the light refraction off the object are two different things, I'm conflating them?
May 07, 2019 at 19:32
Conflating color in general with the experience of color is just that--a conflation. You want to keep repeating a conflation because?
May 07, 2019 at 19:26
"In purely material terms," light refraction IS COLOR. Conflating that with the experience of color is just that--a conflation.
May 07, 2019 at 19:16
"It refracts light a certain way" is what color is.
May 07, 2019 at 19:11
Wait, first, the brain is colorless, odorless?? Brains definitely have a color and would have an odor if you were to smell them. What that has to do w...
May 07, 2019 at 19:03
"Disagreeing" is a way of saying "I feel differently than you do" in these situations. That's a common sense of the term "disagree."
May 07, 2019 at 19:01
It's a non-identical "nothing is identical over time" at the different time. You seem to be unfamiliar with nominalism, by the way.
May 07, 2019 at 18:58
It's not as if this is hard to figure out. If nothing is identical through time, then "Nothing is identical through time" isn't identical through time...
May 07, 2019 at 18:43
Yes, it does, as nothing is identical through time.
May 07, 2019 at 18:39
The answer changes even though I say the so-called "same thing," because nothing is literally identical through time. The idea of something being the ...
May 07, 2019 at 18:26
No such thing.
May 07, 2019 at 18:15
Yes, especially given that all evidence points to it.
May 07, 2019 at 18:14
Right, which there are for believing that mind is identical to brain, but not otherwise.
May 07, 2019 at 16:51
I'd say that we know that they're physical processes of the brain. I wouldn't say that it's impossible that they could be something else. But there wo...
May 07, 2019 at 14:41
Sometimes you're just presenting an alternate way to look at or feel about things, by the way. For example, I'll often say things like, "I disagree. I...
May 07, 2019 at 13:27
Right, so re your concept of "iron," more than one "iron atom" is necessary to have "iron" (without "atom" appended). So the essence of iron for you i...
May 07, 2019 at 13:24
Well, I just mentioned two things that we can do: (a) make it so that politics can't be an ongoing career, or (b) make it so that the requirement to p...
May 07, 2019 at 13:14
Rather than seeing it as "short-sighted" versus "long-sighted," I think it's more a matter of politics being a career for politicians. Politicians und...
May 07, 2019 at 12:53