Terrapin Station

Can abstractions occur outside of our minds? I don't think they can. So if concepts are abstractions, they can't be transferred from one person to ano...

If A causes B, it doesn't imply that A is identical to B, does it? And if A is not identical to B, then A or, whatever makes A obtain, isn't literally...

That kind of "dualistic" view is what the world is like. What's your alternate ontology?

That phrase I can't figure out unfortunately. Again, culture can influence values, but you can't actually be given values from something outside of yo...

I don't think it works to just plow over someone saying that in fact they can think both sentences at the same time. Even if you can't do that, and I'...

You've got to be kidding me. I had just quoted you saying "The point is the difference between equity and fairness" (along with one other short senten...

But what is the teacher going to present --a set of words a la a set of sounds or text marks? Is that what concepts are?

The point is that you can't literally be given concepts via social means. You believe we can be given concepts. So I'm giving you a chance to support ...

Let's get more specific, though. How does someone literally learn a concept?

How would you say that culture can impart a conceptual framework? How would you be able to literally acquire concepts from someone else?

"It doesn't refer to anything" would make no sense. And that's not at all suggested by nominalism. It refers to whatever an individual has in mind whe...

It's going to be some particular or particulars, with spatiotemporal locations, related to what the person has in mind, including what their concept i...

Ah--no, I'm not familiar with it. I'm not much of a bar person.

It's about social interaction, and social interaction influences it, but the social realm can't literally have moral stances, because we can't have mo...

I did answer it, though. Let's explain the answer to you, although you're asking in a slightly different way there. Are you asking what the person has...

No idea at the moment what that's a reference to (the "Frying Pan").

I think of things in probabilistic terms only in a frequentist context, as I described above.

When you speak of something, you're going to have your concept or idea of it in mind, sure.

It's not just yes or no, because we're not just talking about one thing/one aspect. The whole way this conversation started was with my response to th...

Yes. Many aspects of it.

I'd (unfortunately) guess that most families wouldn't actually agree with that.

Via observations and reasoning basically. (I don't want to answer more than one thing at a time, because I want to focus on stuff so that we make prog...

In a discussion where we're getting down to the nuts and bolts of this stuff, then, we'd have to clarify in just what sense or context we're asking th...

How it sounds to you is irrelevant to what's the case ontologically, especially if you buy realism re univerals/types to any extent, as well as if you...

By the way, here's the only way that I think it makes some sense to do probabilities (aside from 1(00) and 0): We have some phenomena that we can obse...

0%

Right. So what would be interesting to me is to figure out why you would say this.

It's not literally/in terms of logical identity just "one song." I'm a nominalist, by the way. I don't buy that there are any real/extramental/objecti...

The spatiotemporal location is everywhere/every time that it's performed, as well as everywhere/everytime that it's documented in some manner, includi...

Yes. A fortiori because everything is spatiotemporal.

What I'm trying to explore is why you'd think that I don't know the true nature of reality.

It doesn't seem like the distinction you're proposing is holding up to analysis, but we'd have to explore it in more detail.

"Mutually dependent" doesn't mean "they're identical so that we can't possibly separate them" does it? After all, if it meant that, we'd not even be a...

I asked you to be specific about what you can't make sense of/why you can't make sense of it. Pretty much quoting the whole thing isn't being specific...

Sure, so start with the first phrase you quoted. "If you substitute those terms in what I wrote" You are not familiar with the idea of substituting on...

Again, you'd have to be a bit more specific about what seems like nonsense/gibberish to you. Presumably not all of it, because presumably you're not s...

Sure, so earlier you brought up the nature/nurture distinction. ("The source of morals is both nature and nurture.") We're talking about biology and s...

Okay, then let's make sure we understand what the other person is claiming before we agree or disagree. What part of what you quoted are you unsure ab...

So it would follow that I'm not interested in a conversation with you, right?

I do mind, because for me to think that a conversation is worthwhile, I need to know that you can think about things off-script. You need to be able t...

I'm using "feel" in the sense of being aware of something or experiencing something. You're aware of/you experience that you know this, right?

Here was what I claimed that you disagreed with. Nurture doesn't actually provide moral stances in any sense, because we don't actually have dispositi...

Of course it doesn't. How can something be a moral stance when there's not even any disposition towards allowing versus not allowing some behavior?

Nurture influences, but can't provide morals. x influencing y is different than x being identical to y.

If you're only accepting blueprint answers, where's your alternate blueprint answer?

So is it not the case that you feel that you don't know the true nature of reality? You don't feel that you know the true nature of reality, do you?

Can't wait. I'm sure we'll make a lot of progress when you get back.

So if you know that, doesn't it follow that you don't know the true nature of reality?

Do you know that you have no idea about the true nature of reality?

You feel that you don't know the true nature of reality. Based on this, you're figuring that I feel the same way. Why?