Terrapin Station

Value is "in the eye of the beholder," in the same sense that beauty is.

How is "beneficial to interests" different from meeting one's preferences with respect to interests? (And how are one's interests not just preferences...

No, that's claiming that there is a distinction. It's not specifying what the distinction is supposed to be--that is, what the specific properties of ...

Smart in this case would presumably refer to "being able to recognize what's required to win and being able to successfully adapt to that."

I'm going to address what we type sentence by sentence. If that's not addressing "the actual relevant point" in your view, then I suppose so. Addressi...

First off, that's not people?

But people do the defining, right?

I'm not saying anything about significance quantification. It's just that whether something is still the same subject or not is always a matter of ind...

It could be from your perspective (and obviously it was). It's always from someone's perspective. What are my interests that voting for Trump will be ...

"The same turtle" is an abstraction that hinges on what an individual requires to consider something the same x at two different times. Or in other wo...

First, you never brought up personal identity per se, and I was never talking about that (until I realized that maybe you were conflating the two, the...

It wasn't changing the subject from my perspective. It was always what I was talking about. And on that view, I'm asking you to specify a distinction.

What determines that in your view?

Well, it's relevant because that's all that I'm arguing and that you're supposedly arguing against--that "best interests" is a matter of preferences.

Well, I think that humans are animals first off. But re "non-human animals," I'm fairly agnostic on that, though I'm fine assuming that non-human anim...

Yeah, particularly people who came to the country legally and who worked hard to change their status to permanent resident and then citizen, who worke...

What I'd like is for you to give the specific characterization of the two terms that makes a distinction between them coherent.

Okay, but the mere mention of something being "conceptual" doesn't at all suggest an ontological commitment. Dualists are going to probably see concep...

If you respond right away, I'll be gone for about 10-15 minutes. Be back then.

Let's get back to that in one minute. Do you agree that the word "concept" doesn't imply an ontological commitment on the physical/nonphysical issue? ...

Yes, of course. I'm a physicalist. And people who aren't physicalists will likely think that concepts are nonphysical. The word "concept" itself doesn...

It doesn't make any sense that something being "in the best interest" of someone isn't (a) a subjective judgment of an individual, and (b) about their...

(Maybe it will sink in on one repetition)

Of course, but that has NOTHING TO DO with whether something is physical/nonphysical

Which again, says nothing about the physical/nonphysical issue.

Yes. Those definitions say nothing about whether anything is physical or nonphysical. That's not an issue that anyone addresses when talking about per...

Which I'm challenging analyzes to anything coherent. Can you support how that would be possible? That would be a step in suggesting a coherent distinc...

What's the example? What's P in this case?

In what way? Not re physical/nonphysical. AGAIN, their definition has NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. It makes no coment about any issues in that realm.

Also, I wasn't quoting definitions of "personal identity" necessarily because I agree with the definitions I was quoting. I was quoting them because p...

Again, "The issue of whether it's physical or nonphysical has absolutely nothing to do with any conventional definition of it," including the SEP defi...

That I consider it to be physical has absolutely nothing to do with the conventional definition of "personal identity," and nowhere did I claim that i...

You mean like this? "You don't know what you're talking about TS. You define words to suit your arguments and then ridicule others for not knowing wha...

You could sell me a bridge more easily than you could convince me that you have any sort of philosophy degree or significant philosophical background,...

It's certainly fun to watch yourself continually hoisted by your own petard. So keep going.

Sure, so how are you attempting to separate preferences and best interests, outcome assessments, etc.? What's the distinction you attempt?

Right, so you're claiming that the sentence you quoted isn't consistent with the SEP definition?

How are you attempting to separate preferences and best interests, outcome assessments, etc.? What's the distinction you attempt?

(I actually know/have known people who have swam with sharks, by the way, including Ron and Valerie Taylor . . .)

You believe that some people shouldn't do things they like in that vein, because someone else feels differently about it? They should do what the othe...

Ah--I misread you as saying "If I can't stand waters that ARE infested with sharks"--I didn't read it as "AREN'T" That's why it made no sense to me. S...

It might have but I was addressing only that sentence. Are you saying that that sentence can't stand on its own as a claim?

What I quoted, because it's what I was addressing, was this sentence: "Strangely, Terrapin's definition of personal identity is entirely different fro...

If trump is the sharks, but I can't stand Clinton, then you'd be equivocating "sharks"

Okay, but you said that the definition I gave was entirely different from the definition of personal identity one should be familiar if one has a phil...

Right, so a definition from the SEP isn't entirely different than what one would be familiar with if one is educated in philosophy, right?

Thanks for answering, but we're not done yet. Is the SEP "entirely different" from the received views in philosophy?

It didn't stop being true at any point. Yes, and subjective, and noncognitive. Statements containing those terms are never correct or incorrect, true ...

That's a yes or no question. I wouldn't count any answer that doesn't have "yes" or "no" in it, or at least an explanation why you can't answer yes or...

You know that "worst"/"best" etc. are subjective, right? What does "can't stand" have to do with anything I said about Trump?