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

Terrapin Station

Comments

I'd add that it has to be more than a mere correlation, it has to be a "direct connection" between two things (I would say an intentional connection, ...
March 02, 2019 at 20:51
It's certainly possible that someone does. Here's how you know: you ask the person in question.
March 02, 2019 at 20:33
You can just make up shit, you mean? There is no "general rule" about preferences that is universal. In addition, there are no preferences period, whe...
March 02, 2019 at 20:29
Because they've expressed them. Sometimes formally: again, here's an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_healthcare_directive If you want t...
March 02, 2019 at 20:17
For an unconscious person, their preferences prior to being unconscious are what matter (for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_healthcare...
March 02, 2019 at 20:09
They can't withhold consent can they?
March 02, 2019 at 20:01
I don't think it needs to be explained. At any rate, there's no way I'd get into a "Does this work/count as an explanation" discussion without you fir...
March 02, 2019 at 20:00
The issue is whether the person being born is granting consent or not, correct?
March 02, 2019 at 19:55
I guess you could say desire to not be in pain, although we could just say pain and not add another step to it.
March 02, 2019 at 18:52
What happened to this part: "Possibilities simply amount to a state not being impossible given contingent facts. "Potential" is often used with a more...
March 02, 2019 at 18:29
Not to mention that it has nothing whatsoever to do with climate scientists' area of expertise. But we can't even predict simple sociological phenomen...
March 02, 2019 at 15:56
Say what? Nothing has no properties. It's not infinite (in whatever respect you're thinking of that) or anything else.
March 02, 2019 at 14:38
Well, and presumably He'd not even create the rest of the universe in that case, as that would have been doing something, changing in some way.
March 02, 2019 at 13:59
I want "bantery" posts anyway, even if we're "strictly" doing philosophy. I prefer chatting to message board posting partially for this reason. It's t...
March 02, 2019 at 13:55
If I were going to bother "proving wrong" every ridiculous or dubious thing that anyone said, that's all I'd be doing 24/7. I'll let a sort of natural...
March 02, 2019 at 13:35
One popular model has God necessarily not doing anything. He's supposed to be "changeless."
March 02, 2019 at 13:30
Change obtains because things are in motion. It could also obtain acausally or indeterministically. Possibilities simply amount to a state not being i...
March 02, 2019 at 13:28
Keep reading. One distinction was the sentence that followed in the post you quoted: "If there are physical laws, it's literally impossible to 'disobe...
March 02, 2019 at 13:20
I don't agree with Wittgenstein, though. (And in my opinion the "Wittgenstein cult" is one of the worst things to happen to philosophy in the last 100...
March 02, 2019 at 13:16
Square one was me asking you what empirical evidence you're referring to re the unclear-to-me phrase "circumstances of the possible future event"?
March 02, 2019 at 03:36
Look, basically you think of things like definitions as being meaning, and the definitions still exist as words in a dictionary, say, even when no peo...
March 02, 2019 at 03:27
Anything extant has empirical evidence available --it has properties, for example. The relevant context here is whether there's empirical evidence. Wh...
March 02, 2019 at 03:20
Hence, empirical evidence isn't inappropriate. I just said that whether we're aware of it is pertinent to whether there's any reason to believe it.
March 02, 2019 at 03:14
Our awareness is about epistemology. Ontologically, empirical evidence is appropriate if we're talking about things that have properties, that interac...
March 02, 2019 at 03:03
First, the idea re whether empirical evidence is appropriate or not isn't saying anything dependent on our awareness.
March 02, 2019 at 02:52
So something could exist, have properties, etc. but there could be no evidence of it?
March 02, 2019 at 02:48
A phenomenon is any event, occurrence, etc.
March 02, 2019 at 02:41
An existent non-phenomenon? Are you just randomly combining words?
March 02, 2019 at 02:38
If phenomena exist, there's going to be some empirical evidence of it.
March 02, 2019 at 02:35
Right, we don't agree. What is elaboration going to do?
March 02, 2019 at 02:31
Elaborate --because you don't understand what I'm saying?
March 02, 2019 at 02:27
That's how conversations work, dude.
March 02, 2019 at 02:26
Wtf? I just said that it's ridiculous in my opinion to think that empirical evidence is ever inappropriate, especially when we're doing ontology. That...
March 02, 2019 at 02:25
Yes -- evidence, empirical evidence. Why do I have to spell that out completely every time? You can't remember what I said?
March 02, 2019 at 02:20
What happened to what I just typed? There's zero evidence of meaning outside of thought. That has nothing to do with logical positivism.
March 02, 2019 at 02:18
No one is saying anything about "verification" or anything like that.
March 02, 2019 at 02:13
The idea that it would ever be inappropriate, especially when we're talking about ontology, is ridiculous.
March 02, 2019 at 02:11
The empirical evidence there is of us doing something. There's zero evidence of meaning obtaining outside of that. We obviously do not think of the ma...
March 02, 2019 at 02:04
What I'm going by is empirical evidence. There's no empirical evidence of meaning obtaining outside of people thinking in particular ways. There's no ...
March 02, 2019 at 01:51
Get lost with that crap. Societal problems could happen. It's not a bad idea to prepare for that possibility. The problem is that there's no way in he...
March 01, 2019 at 23:24
Let's see if we agree on a couple things so we don't have to go back over them: We agree that "If x is/means/etc. y, then x is/means/etc. y" is tautol...
March 01, 2019 at 22:36
Consent is a category error because there's no one to either grant or withhold consent. We need there to be a person capable of granting or withholdin...
March 01, 2019 at 21:48
Typo--I'm trying to get used to a new keyboard. I guess I wasn't hitting the shift key right. :wink: Anyway, so I guess I'd need to ask Mr. Gensler wh...
March 01, 2019 at 15:36
I brushed over that the first time I read your post. That's an English paraphrase of 1=1=2 according to whom? It certainly bears no resemblance to any...
March 01, 2019 at 15:28
duplicate
March 01, 2019 at 15:11
It's not that it's trivial it's that it's a category error. I've explained this to you before. It doesn't stop being a category error just because you...
March 01, 2019 at 14:46
Likewise, there's nothing in "If Herbert Hoover is president, then Herbert Hoover is president" to imply that that will change, is there? The conditio...
March 01, 2019 at 13:01
You don't think either is worthwhile. Okay. So what am I supposed to do with that information now?
March 01, 2019 at 12:50
Knowledge of epistemology?
March 01, 2019 at 12:48
Here's how that reads to me: "I (, unenlightened,) also do not know enough about epistemology to realize why a claim like that is a problem."
March 01, 2019 at 12:48