Terrapin Station

I'm certainly not questioning that you have that psychological experience. But it's just a psychological experience. And after all, if the psychologic...

Actually, I'm just saying that "all possible things are possible" is a lot different rhetorically that "anything and everything is possible." Even tho...

Well, or you're just believing something that's grossly in error.

It's an empirical issue. You're not claiming that it's an a priori matter, are you?

Yeah, you'd say that one can only be referring to the possible things that are possible.

But you'd be saying that anything is possible . . . as long as it's possible. Which isn't saying anything insofar as "anything is possible" goes.

Because that's the concept of universals. A different concept is different (obviously). It's not the same issue. If the "law of nature" obtains separa...

Oy vey. How the heck can it be a fact that one person had greater insights than another? What are we looking at in the extramental world to determine ...

You don't believe that someone could feel that Russell had far greater insights than Nietzsche?

The reason it's not a universal is because it's not a matter of something separate from the particulars in question, where the particulars are instant...

Again, you realize that this is a matter of tastes/preferences, right? In my opinion, among philosophers, Russell easily gets the top slot as a writer...

Well, arguably that would still amount to nominalism, though it depends on just what thought amounts to on that view, I suppose. Note that it wouldn't...

Wait--but you're just noting that goodness is an idea that multiple people have. What would be the evidence that it's not simply a mental phenomenon--...

What I said was: "Depending on what's plugged into the variables, that could very well be an objective fact. There are tons of objective facts of that...

It's not any sort of fact that all x are y where we don't plug anything into the variables and where we have no context, like a logical argument. It's...

When I write, "Depending on what's plugged into the variables, that could very well be an objective fact" in response to that, what happens that cause...

Depending on what's plugged into the variables, that could very well be an objective fact. There are tons of objective facts of that form.

Are you presenting your view now?

No I'm not saying that truth and subjective are the same thing. <sigh> It seems like you're not really interested in trying to understand what it is t...

And you're figuring that I'm a follow-the-crowd-off-the-bridge type of guy?

Am I saying that the truth-value itself corresponds to an objective fact?

If I think he's a good choice, in the context of this thread, I'm saying that he's a good choice for "most overrated."

No part, and what you're quoting from me in no way suggests that I'd say any part is objective.

No one is saying that the judgment itself corresponds to an objective judgment. So no one is saying that the judgment is an objective fact--in fact, i...

Right. There are no objective truths and nobody is saying that "the truth part" corresponds to something objective. (If they were saying that, it woul...

That's correct. Statements are not objective facts, but they can be about objective facts. That's a matter of how someone thinks about the statement i...

Statements aren't objective period. You can simply be referring to the ink marks or sounds or whatever, but they require meaning to be statements (or ...

It does have something to do with what's objectively the case if we're using correspondence theory.

<sigh> as is everything, so there's no need to point that out.

Right, at least in the vast majority of cases. Also you don't need "subjective" in front of "truth," since all truth is subjective.

It doesn't matter in the sense that it has no impact on most facts, sure.

No. Not at all. Something being an objective fact has nothing to do with my judgment. (Normally at least--there are cases where this differs, but not ...

Sure. But whether it's an objective fact in no way hinges on truth (judgments). It's just like noting that the existence of a banana has nothing to do...

Right. So what was the point of all of that nonsense?

Assuming that's written as you intended to write it, I agree with that. It's not an objective fact that is (what's) true. What's true is a judgment be...

On your view you mean? Because it's not on my view. On my view, that nothing is objectively true is an objective fact. It's just that it's not objecti...

That's a very good point.

How the heck do you "say it as if it's objectively true"? You mean, "I read that as if (you're saying) it's objectively true, because I have a difficu...

Well no shit that it can't be objectively true, since nothing is objectively true. When you ask how one can know if it's true, you're asking how one a...

Maybe try saying why you don't consider the earlier response to answer the question? Otherwise I'd have to try to make wild guesses about why you'd be...

Every contintental philosopher who is well-regarded. I'd include Kant in that by the way. Aside from that, Wittgenstein is a good choice, especially a...

Personally I think the Tractatus sucks. I don't care for Wittgenstein in general, but the way the Tractatus is written is garbage in my opinion. Philo...

Our "contact" can be via the mind, but what you're claiming to "contact" isn't itself mind, right? (Otherwise, you're really a nominalist.) So if what...

By observing that no matter where one looks, there is no objective/extramental value to be found, and thus no value to get right, or to know the truth...

But I just said this: the better approach is to simply talk about what's present in an individual's mind on a particular occasion of an utterance.

By the way, I've always seen a lot of this sort of work as an upshot of the ridiculousness of trying to avoid psychologism or simply a subjectivist ac...

Right, so if what Ralph believes is not just that someone has some particular property, but that in a case like "Ralph believes there is a spy," he be...

Yeah, I found and I'm reading that paper now. (1) is a "relational" translation per Quine's terminology, and he believes it has problems. (2) is a "no...

I don't recall this offhand, but I agree with Metaphysican Undercover's comment. That Ralph believes there is a spy doesn't imply "there exists some x...

Provide citations for having a complaint? LOL