You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Terrapin Station

Comments

I explained this already. By judging that murder, in general, is wrong, or that one shouldn't murder.
November 15, 2016 at 02:32
Committing murder is behavior, for example. It's not like it's not behavior just because we're talking about it in general rather than a particular in...
November 15, 2016 at 02:25
Again, none of those scenarios would make any sense if one didn't posit the realist picture in the first place.
November 15, 2016 at 02:17
No. What I'm referring to is such as "One shouldn't murder," or "It is wrong to murder." That is a judgment about behavior. At any rate, whether you c...
November 15, 2016 at 01:32
Then you're not talking about ethics. You don't have ethics if you don't have judgments about behavior. If you're just saying that, say, someone stabb...
November 15, 2016 at 01:05
Well that would certainly be wrong. We'd have to examine his argument for this to specify where he's going off the rails, though. Identity is differen...
November 15, 2016 at 00:55
There are many different definitions of "information," yes. That's the case with many terms. There are many different conventional definitions of many...
November 15, 2016 at 00:14
So I'm taking it that you were linking to Harry Hindu's post? What definition of "information" are you using so that you think that the idea of "infor...
November 14, 2016 at 23:35
Haha, okay
November 14, 2016 at 23:04
On my kindle, that aligns as if you're linking to Harry Hindu's post, but I'm guessing you're instead linking to my post above it. I just don't know w...
November 14, 2016 at 23:00
I'd certainly not agree with that. Ethical judgments are necessarily mental. How would we make sense out of saying that there are nonmental judgments?
November 14, 2016 at 22:56
Yes, insofar as we're talking about anything other than a brain functioning in a mental way, we're talking about something objective. So, for example,...
November 14, 2016 at 22:46
I thought you weren't replying to me any longer? Do you believe that for some reason I'm defining things in terms of experience per se? Why?
November 14, 2016 at 22:45
"Existentialist" has tended to be like "hipster." Everyone denies that they are one, whether that's the case or not.
November 14, 2016 at 22:22
Subjective = mental phenomena, that is, brains functioning in mental ways. Objective = the complement of mental phenomena, or in other words--"everyth...
November 14, 2016 at 22:20
I've brought this point up again and again. Who is saying that perception, window panes, transparent glasses, etc. LITERALLY contain the objects that ...
November 14, 2016 at 22:17
"Confusing" in the sense that you can't make out what a word like "brain" refers to. Yeah, obviously. You're not a non-adaptable robot are you?
November 14, 2016 at 22:12
Yes--my different view is that words like "brain," "rock," stereo speaker," etc. aren't that confusing. I don't have to wonder what they could possibl...
November 14, 2016 at 21:24
What terms referring to "everyday objects in the world"/"natural kinds" are not "fuzzy patterns with undefined boundaries" in your view? Give an examp...
November 14, 2016 at 21:01
Actually, I'd say that the part I put in italics is wrong unless there's some reason to believe that what we're receiving on the TV screen isn't accur...
November 14, 2016 at 20:51
"I don't buy," in other words equals, "That's wrong" People do not want to explicitly want to not be hit by a car when they look both ways before cros...
November 14, 2016 at 20:43
Ask and you shall receive: .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain
November 14, 2016 at 20:41
Sorry, I get you two mixed up sometimes, just because of the two-word names starting with "B."
November 14, 2016 at 19:41
I don't think that there's anything that remains literally the same. I think that it's simply a matter of being connected to and developing out of pre...
November 14, 2016 at 19:19
I commented a number times earlier in the thread, but I didn't comment much and there are so many pages . . . it kind of got buried. Anyway, "objectiv...
November 14, 2016 at 19:15
If you've seen that in this thread, this thread has problems.
November 14, 2016 at 16:07
But I don't buy implicit valuations. Valuing something is explicit. If you've never considered the question of "whether life is worth living," you don...
November 14, 2016 at 15:51
It has no objective value, but "objective value" is a category error anyway. It has subjective value to me, and that's the nature of value. It's a sub...
November 14, 2016 at 15:34
I don't agree with that. Let's say that you've never at all considered whether life was worth living, but you engage in/with philosophy and you value ...
November 14, 2016 at 14:21
I hadn't been following the conversation for a number of posts. I just saw the comment about Africa. Yeah, the "these folks are worse off than you" th...
November 14, 2016 at 14:18
This is certainly an aside, but just fyi, Africa is actually as complexly varied as the rest of the world. We're talking about 54 different countries,...
November 14, 2016 at 13:37
And on the other hand, I'd say that the most important set of philosophical questions, at least for philosophy majors, would be this: "Why am I majori...
November 14, 2016 at 13:26
If you look at the low side of the estimate it's not a "vast majority" for this single reason, but it's not all the reasons he listed: That site also ...
November 14, 2016 at 13:13
Really, the first question that the vast majority of people (and maybe everyone) deals with re philosophy is one of these two: (1) Just what is "philo...
November 14, 2016 at 13:04
It probably seems to be one of the most important problems for people with severe depression. I'd actually say that the most important problem for the...
November 14, 2016 at 12:58
The difference between the two is that representationalists think that, in addition to the perceptual processes that naive/direct realists acknowledge...
November 14, 2016 at 12:13
Yes, by saying, ""If vaccination rates drop below 95% in a community it's well on the way to being as dangerous as no vaccinations at all."
November 14, 2016 at 01:28
In my ontology, there's mattter in the "traditional sense"--chunks of "stuff," basically, and then there are structures of matter--that is the relatio...
November 13, 2016 at 21:43
Sure. My conclusion? That possibility is incorrect.
November 13, 2016 at 21:23
Which is a misunderstanding of the debate. No one is saying that perception isn't involved in perception (of course), no one is saying that perception...
November 13, 2016 at 19:00
That and a couple other comments you make imply that you believe that folks must accept received view interpretations of the sciences, but that's not ...
November 13, 2016 at 18:52
Don't start drooling, too, or men in white coats might haul you away.
November 13, 2016 at 18:45
I don't see how that's related to the question you're asking in the subject line of the thread. Anyway, it would only be unexplainable to one why some...
November 13, 2016 at 18:42
Wouldnt it be more dangerous if 100% of folks had no immunity?
November 13, 2016 at 18:37
Because your criticism, which persisted after I explained the problem with it, evidenced that you don't understand how definitions work.
November 13, 2016 at 18:34
Oy vey, hahaha. It's like you're not quite able to understand anything I write. I wonder what you'd think I'm saying if I were to write, "My user name...
November 13, 2016 at 18:30
Actually, in able to aid your understanding of my comments, I'd have to get at whatever rudimentary issues are causing you to not even be able to pars...
November 13, 2016 at 16:47
Yeah, exactly.
November 13, 2016 at 15:05
In my opinion it wouldn't be worth my time at this point. My judgment is that you wouldn't be capable of understanding, at least without a monumental ...
November 13, 2016 at 15:00