Terrapin Station

You observe their mind-independent existence. Aside from that, mind is material too.

Not a substratum. Material is all there is--well, material, relations of material and motion of material. We're not positing things we don't observe.

One thing I find curious--and that's the most generous word for it, is something people are suggesting in this thread, and something I've seen suggest...

Yeah, positing a magic genie makes the view a lot more reasonable.

It shouldn't take a third-grader to realize that just because you think that something is true, it doesn't imply that others agree, hence it's still u...

Put that mirror down, son.

The way these things typically work best, by the way, is if: (a) we stay structured re everyone reading along and commenting at the same pace, (b) eve...

What page are we supposed to be up to, and did we include the introduction?

That quote should be memorialized.

Yeah, and Cheetos are really broccoli.

I still think that argumentum ad populums are fallacies.

He said he was a little jerk.

Isn't that basically what I said?

Yes. Do I remember much of it now? No. I read it a long time ago. Come on, now. You can't be so unintelligent that you believe that not agreeing with ...

As you should expect, given that I'm a naive realist. Another theory of perception would have to be well-supported, have good reasons for belief, be p...

Especially when you're not interested in that.

Yes, as something with meaning, etc., it exists in persons' minds (as sets of brain states).

Yeah, make sure to reply to a bunch of comments of mine then.

Good thing you're participating in a discussion thread and commenting on posts then, genius.

In what way would you say that comment has any implication for my explanation of how we can teach particular numbers and the general concept of number...

Again, the simple confusion of knowledge and what knowledge is about.

He may attempt to do that, but he certainly doesn't succeed.

Baby's First Descartes

I can still remember the first time I ran into someone who took Berkeley's idealism seriously. I couldn't believe it. Prior to that I had the impressi...

I wouldn't say that any awareness is voluntary. That suggests that prior to being aware, you make a decision to be(come) aware.

Insofar as I understand what you are saying there, sure.

In your initial post, i don't think that you're describing compatibilism in either 1 or 2. Of course, keep in mind that I'm of the view that compatibi...

Yeah, I'd agree those seem to be the only two options, but if randomness is involved, it could be that we can bias the outcomes, so that there's a 10%...

And what was your assessment of the "little jerk" part?

Something else such as?

I don't have much of a background on "middle knowledge" or the "counterfactuals of creaturely freedom." Could you explain the argument for the above?

Rights are something we "invent," basically. I'm not saying that we sit down and intentionally invent them. They're a natural way for us to think/to f...

I was raised an atheist. I'm happy to stick with that.

I agree with premise 1. The problem with "a unicorn," "God," etc. here is that we can't conflate ideas with other sorts of things. Unicorns and gods a...

If we think that mental states might not exist, then what the heck are we even talking about in the "before you think you have decided to do it" part?

Jesus I'm getting sick of that nonsense here. Why is this place infested with idealists? Is there like some idealist network where they all tell each ...

That's fine, but I didn't want to read that into it without you explicitly saying so, just in case your view was otherwise. To me, this all seems like...

I agree with that. In my view time is identical to motion or change. The idea of a "frozen slice of motion/change" doesn't make any sense. It's not mo...

Would negative utilitarianism even make sense as a stance to hold under your ontology? I'm not sure how that would work.

I wouldn't say either. Breathing is not a convention (conventions are basically arbitrary behavior, things we make up, that people follow because othe...

Again, the way that you can (and that people sometimes do) this (and red, etc.) ostensively is like this: Let's say that someone points at a pair of s...

At any rate, as a "reading group" shouldn't we actually be reading along in the text together rather than making very general comments about the text ...

I'd have to reread Kripke's arguments about this--it's been awhile since I read it, so I'm not saying that I agree with him or anything like that, but...

That would require an additional step a la "and there must be a way of resolving what would count as being incorrect about such knowledge because . . ...

"in other words, differing positional relations" Weren't you asking for explanations and not asking me to write dictionary entries? (And if you're ask...

No--"so that it can"="so that this is not excluded" The grammatical comment was because the sentence didn't really make any sense to me, overall, as w...

Because thankfully, the percentage of people who believe anything like "there is no such truth or state of affairs, instead, there are just everyone's...

Okay, but for something like that, presumably we would (or at least could) be talking about a job where there are a lot of employees, right? So if we'...

That's fine.. But what I'm asking you is if you think the standard view there is that those properties obtain via interaction of mind and the object. ...

I'm not arguing that you're using any words incorrectly first off. I'm not saying anything about words per se. And yes, most people use "correct"/"inc...