Terrapin Station

No one is doubting that you have the beliefs that you do. And of course, the party line comment above applies here.

Put that mirror down.

One idea I have about people who see marketing/advertising as an affront is that they're perhaps people who tend to be very suggestible and who tend t...

Haha

Surely if I mentioned the word "theory," I meant that quite literally.

Were you just saying that you a desire to buy something is required, and no particular emotional state other than that?

Seems like you took offense at my comment. Presumably you're someone who sees advertising/marketing as an affront? We could explore why you feel that ...

First off, no matter who you are, no matter what your disposition, you need food, clothing (in most climates), shelter (again in most climates), some ...

Wait a minute--what are we taking to be evidence of a "widely reported increase in mental illness" (as well as unhappiness as someone else said), and ...

Okay, if you want to endlessly argue with me about interpretation, let's do that. That will be fun. (1) you'd need to argue that the non-inferential k...

With the second section, "Another Language," I don't have any major objections yet, at least barring a few comments in the last few paragraphs that I'...

Well, and you should be able to guess that the thought is mutual.

Prove that he should prove it.

I don't agree with this. He's explaining how a sense datum theorist might approach the problem, but he's critiquing the approach in that same paragrap...

Yes, one's "meaning of life" could be anything. None of them are more or less "valid." Validity is a category error for this. It would be ridiculous b...

I don't at all agree with your interpretation, and I don't think the passage makes sense on your interpretation. He's specifying that sense datum theo...

In my view, truths are judgments we make about propositions. This, the location in question is our brains.

Well, but the objection just turns out to be the old "we can't be 100% certain that any given sense datum is veridical," as if 100% certainty should b...

He explains this in this passage: I don't at all buy his "therefore" in that passage, though. It seems like a non-sequitur to me.

So do you have anything to say about the first couple sections of Sellars' paper, or are you just never going to get around to that?

Here's another problem with the Sellars paper: he says, "It would seem, then, that the sensing of sense contents cannot constitute knowledge, inferent...

And that's what I answered. Yes, I understand what they believe, meaning the same thing as I understand why they believe this. Yeah, no shit, as if th...

Isn't provable you mean? Whether you want to or not, you're going to believe some empirical claims, despite the fact that empirical claims are not pro...

No, I'm not asking that. What I said above was not that I understand that they're wrong. I said that I understand what they believe, and that what the...

What's the difference in your view?

Sure, I understand what they believe that's wrong.

Well, I'll get the opportunity to note some of the many ways Sellars goes wrong, for one. :-)

Yes, and on my view, nothing exists that isn't a spatiotemporal entity. In fact, the idea of a non-spatiotemporal existent is incoherent on my view.

He says the following: As with "particulars," I just use "sense data" in the usual way. Per SEP for example: That last sentence describes me.

In the standard way, or at least per the core of the standard way. For example, per Wikipedia: "In metaphysics, particulars are defined as concrete, s...

^ This I agree with everything Bitter Crank said there.

Re the beginning of Sellars paper, the first big problem I have with it is his distinction between particulars and facts. Facts are particulars. Re hi...

Re your thought experiment, there doesn't seem to be anything random about it, by the way. It would be practically impossible to predict the exact num...

I expected your post to simply say, "It has an app for it."

Only insofar as Christianity makes claims about gods. Atheism is only a lack of belief in gods or a belief that there are no gods. There's nothing els...

Empirical claims are not provable. Period. So nothing to worry about there. Whatever it is, if it's an empirical claim, it's not provable. There's no ...

Atheism, as others have noted, is only a lack of belief in gods, or a belief that no gods exist. There's not actually an "atheistic view of death." Re...

I wouldn't say that your suggestion for a logical argument version of the quote at all captures what the quote expresses. First, the quote exploits so...

I'll answer as soon as you answer my question (in a way that I consider an answer)

LOL given your comments on logical matters.

Your belief about this would hinge on what I say about it?

Are you uncomfortable talking about yourself?

LOL

Sure, and I'm not at all surprised that you doubt that. My response to your comment earlier wasn't at all facetious. It was serious.

Needs always hinge on wants/desires though.

Just curious if any of the folks who are against showering, deodorant, brushing their teeth, etc. have at least one romantic partner. (And does your r...

Okay, but that's very different than the "upset" I'm thinking of. If we're simply saying that someone might want (to buy) something rather than not wa...

Are you seriously saying that putting deodorant on is only something you'd do because you've been upset, or that it's some perpetual state of being up...

I'm not sure what example you're talking about, but remember that on my view, becoming isn't primary. Becoming isn't different than being. They're the...

Well, sound and valid are moot points, because I wouldn't say it's an argument. It's not as if there are premises and a conclusion there with an impli...