Terrapin Station

On my view--I'm a nominalist--numerically distinct things can not be identical in any respect. Re the ethical question, things are only wrong or not w...

It depends on who you ask, of course. In my personal view, it actually depends on just how the one person smacks (or whatever they do to) the other. I...

Aren't you familiar with nominalism?

Oh, and by the way, a lot of what I'm interested in when it comes to message boards like this is: I'm interested in people simply because I like peopl...

I'd have to dig for why I thought this, but I thought that re your "assuming the likelihood of broad conformity" you were talking about broad conformi...

First, it has nothing to do left/right politics for me. (And if you're curious, politically I consider myself a libertarian socialist, though I'm a ve...

With respect to normatives? Nothing.

No it can't. There are no true normatives. No normatives that are factual.

I don't write many long posts. I can't recall the last one I wrote. I read long posts until they start introducing a bunch of different issues. You do...

I haven't read every single post on the board. (Shouldn't that be obvious to you?) I've never read a long post here that was focused.

No, not necessarily. Long posts here almost always ramble on about a bunch of different topics or issues.

A topic or issue.

Logic can't prove a normative.

Why--because that's what I asked for an example of (because that's what Isaac was talking about). What argument did I give?

First, did I even give an "argument" for the stance of mine you're taking to be an example?

Because I'm skeptical about what's being claimed. Showing a concrete example of how it would be useful would help convince me.

Looking for a concrete example. A fictional one is fine.

That's not actually what I said in that part, but I don't want to focus on that. You're not understanding what I'm asking for. I'm asking for an examp...

The notion that there's anything difficult or sophisticated required to consent to sexual activities is bizarre. We expect teenagers to understand far...

That's never something I do because (a) things that hinge on how one feels--ethical/moral stances, aesthetic judgments, etc., aren't things for which ...

Instead of picking apart all of the issues this has in my opinion, could you give at least a fictional example of how you think this would work for us...

:up:

See, this is a good example. You're not capable of articulating what you think is wrong with it in any detail. Saying things like "you should know alr...

Because to me, it's what you seem to be doing. It's partially because you can't articulate what your actual views are very well, at least in any detai...

That was a lot of writing to not even answer the question you quoted at the start of it. You said mentioned the "usefulness in discussion" of "assumin...

Nothing uncalm about it. Just honest. I'm not going to indulge something ignorant just because you said it.

So just what is the usefulness in discussion of assuming that? Is it supposed to imply something? What?

But what's the different issue they're getting at? Just announcing that there are things that are more statistically common, as if I'm not aware of th...

Well, so I agree that there are widespread standards for some things, and individuals can choose to acquiesce to them, but the problem arrives in thin...

Haha, I love that old Woody Allen stuff.

Even given that, he asked what it would follow from. You just clarified a definition. You didn't at all address what it would follow from.

You're the best candidate around here for an interpreter, so to speak, but I don't know how successful you can be at that. I'm not going to be able to...

Yeah, you said that because you don't know what the fnck you're talking about.

Holy moley. You go on with all of this Aspieish crap, and you don't answer one friggin question. Obviously we're talking about moral values. And I've ...

Most people, by the way, would say that an "inch" is more or less "what the ruler says it is." Well, here's one report on the variances in rulers: htt...

I'm being sarcastic. There's no way to know that no one has ever had an idea for an alternate measurement standard (again, ignoring that we already kn...

So what would be something that you believe it would be physically impossible to positively or negatively value?

Expression = speech. Not all actions are speech. Stabbing someone isn't speech, for example. A reason to use "expression" instead of "speech" in a com...

Not all actions are speech.

What you seem to be doing is trying to figure out how to interpret normal folks so that per the exact language they happen to use, they don't have any...

Yes. I want to live in a world where anyone can express anything whatsoever, in any context.

What you wrote is "in a sense that I'm making up" as if I were appealing to some unusual sense of the terms.

If someone just comes up to you and says "Kill yourself," the way you know their intent is?

"Kill yourself' would be what's expressed, not intent, right? Intent and what's expressed are not the same.

The justification I'm using is that "correct/incorrect" have a normative connotation, but commonality or consensus do not make normatives obtain. Is t...

Again, intent, what's expressed, and how it's taken are not the same things.

Ummmm . . .

No, it's not, because that wouldn't be a category error.

It would simply be a case of someone thinking something different than what they're saying. There are a number of different ways to do that, including...

Well, don't forget that I'd add that it's not incorrect, either. Correct/incorrect are a category error for this stuff.