Terrapin Station

I'll have to reread that part this morning, as I can't recall that bit.

Yeah, that's what I believe is amusing. There's another fine display of your skills with logic.

Again, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. It's more amusing to me that you don't know.

As if you have a knowledge base for that claim, lol. Philosophy isn't the same thing as people talking about philosophy on message boards.

I'm not trying to convince anyone. It's more amusing that you don't know.

If you'd gone to school for philosophy his bibliography wouldn't matter--you'd be familiar with what fact refers to on the standard view.

Kevin Mulligan, you mean. That doesn't change that fact is standardly defined not just in philosophy, but in the sciences as well as "state of affairs...

Fact is standardly defined not just in philosophy, but in the sciences as well as "state of affairs" and as not the sort of thing that is true or fals...

What would be an alternate way of looking at language rather than seeing it as a "language game"? I sincerely don't know the answer to that. Seeing it...

Sometimes people use the word "velocity" to only refer to speed. Should we use it that way on a board where the intention is to have serious, educated...

"Artificial flower" refers to things like nylon over wire frames, or molded plastic, or various other materials that are made to resemble flowers. "To...

There's such a thing in society/culture. And I am talking about something descriptive rather than prescriptive.

You think wrong.

Are you not familiar with the truth tables for disjunctions?

Is that what "standard usage" refers to?

Truths are not the sorts of things that can be true?

There's only one standard philosophical usage, yes.

The bulk of metaphysics is ontology. It also traditionally refers to "first principles" and philosophy of religion (in combination with ontology). Wei...

Actually, that's not at all the philosophical usage.

In colloquial conventions, which are far more popular than any philosophical usage of terms, "metaphysics" refers to paranormal/parapsychological cont...

So what's your excuse for not sticking to parapsychology when we talk of metaphysics?

Hold on a second--you're conflating logical possibility and consensus/conventional definitions? You've got to be kidding me.

I wouldn't use the word "object," but I'd say that perceptual mental states are of external facts. Of course, I'm a direct/"naive" realist on phil of ...

Why do you think, by the way, that we'd use the phrase "conceivable" if we don't intend to connote something about the mental act of conceptualization...

Okay, and you realize that no one is arguing that the modus ponens is question-begging, right?

You're assuming that everyone is going to see moral right/wrong as a statement about objective properties.

If you were interested in understanding, you wouldn't have simply dumped out of our conversation. You're not interested in understanding. You're inter...

You're a Rand fan? Rand and Deutsch seems like an odd combination.

Sure. And is that just a random list of words, or is there any semantic content?

' Haha, okay. Do A and B in the argument have any content? Or are they just A and B?

You didn't answer if you understand that no one is saying that the modus ponens begs the question. Aren't you interested in understanding what we're s...

Do you understand that no one is saying that the modus ponens begs the question?

I answered this already: The issue has to do with how it's conceivable that consciousness isn't physical.

As I said above to John: Only colloquially, where someone doesn't understand the standard distinction between facts and truth values. If we're going t...

It would be the same if the only way that he's a man in the first place is if you already believe that he's mortal. Jesus Christ. I JUST SAID that it'...

He's not saying that stated as a modus ponens it begs the question. He's saying that it begs the question as an argument for consciousness being non-p...

Again, facts aren't true or false. Propositions are true or false. Think of a bunch of cows in a field versus paintings of a bunch of cows in a field....

Actually, what I should have went with was this: If your user name on thephilosophyforum.com isn't Terrapin Station, then you're going to PayPal Terra...

(It's not a true fact)

It's not the form that has a problem, but the content. It would be like saying: If your user name on thephilosophyforum.com is Michael, then everythin...

Yeah, it definitely strikes me as cult-like. I don't do well with anything that has that mentality. At least not unless I'm the cult leader. ;-) I'm n...

I wouldn't look at it that way. It was just part of a journey that you're on. You're continuing the journey, moving on to another destination now.

Only colloquially, where someone doesn't understand the standard distinction between facts and truth values. If we're going to endorse colloquial conv...

Yes. Truth is relative to individuals, who are the persons making the judgments about how propositions relate to facts, or other propositions, or what...

Not two different "kinds" in my view: Things are events Rather, "If you walk out the door and see that rain is falling, then along with Joe, you'd bel...

^ This. (And something else I agree with Wayfarer on.)

The latter part of that I find strange, because for the first part "techniques of a spiritual nature prescribed by doctors that claim to use evidence-...

Thanks. So, basically a concept about phenomenal properties. It's not saying something about the ontological status of concepts where some are phenome...

If only any of that made it less stupid. ;-) I don't remember a "phenomenal concepts" phrase, by the way. What the heck are "phenomenal concepts" supp...