I didn't see the exchange you're quoting, but it looks to me, based on just those two quotes, like Mongrel read andrewk's comment as saying, "It's a p...
I have an understanding of all of the words you're using, and most of the phrases you write make sense to me, but put together into sentences and chai...
In my view truth is subjective. (Namely, it's a subjective judgment regarding the relation of a proposition to something else--states of affairs in th...
Empirical studies can only give you non-valued information. You can then use that to figure out how to be more likely to achieve your subjective aims....
I'd agree that idealism doesn't necessarily entail solipsism, but I don't know if I've ever seen any good reasons why it doesn't in any particuar case...
I'm actually fine with laws against it, ceteris paribus re the current status quo, as the utility of those laws is that it makes it easier for folks t...
I'm guessing that you're referring primarily to eating meat? First, remember that I do not consider non-human animals persons anywhere near the level ...
I don't agree that empirical research can actually demonstrate this. I don't have a problem assuming that some non-human animals have consciousness. I...
Well, first off, I don't buy the idea of brainwashing, period. I'd also say that I don't buy the idea of hypnosis period, though it depends on just ho...
Well, for one, I don't consider any strictly "psychological harm" unethical and I especially wouldn't make any laws regarding it. (Which reminds me th...
But I specified that I can't make sense of the distinction of physical/nonphysical. That's because the very notion of "nonphysical" is incoherent. I j...
The difference is that my physicalism only arises because people claim dualism etc., where they're relying on a putative distinction that's incoherent...
I'm trying to imagine myself as an idealist for a moment: I believe that the occurrence of a toaster is just a mental phenomenon (assuming that makes ...
I'm skeptical that you could make any sense of an objective/real category if you're positing that we can only know (either epistemically or by acquain...
It seems like you're getting at something that I argue, but I instead stress that representationalist-oriented idealism can't get at a support for its...
It just seemed like it to me because you keep stressing that and only that. So is something objective to you under the view I gave by virtue of it bei...
, you seem to only use objective (and "real" in other instances) as referring to something existing when it's not being observed (rather than noting t...
"Best interests" is always about preferences, and preferences are always individual (even when a bunch of individuals have the same preferences). "max...
Not looking to hijack your thread, darthbarracuda, and I'll go back and look at your post in a moment, but this is related and I wanted to post it som...
It's a thought experiment about something that's logically possible. Logical possibility is different than metaphysical possibility, if you want to ar...
In the logically possible scenario I presented, it coincidentally occurred when observation stopped. There was nothing causal about it--as I stipulate...
I don't think that any ideas are too ridiculous to entertain in a philosophical context. And thought experiments aren't typically very "realistic" in ...
So in your opinion if the IEP says, "The object is something that presumably exists independent of the subject’s perception of it. In other words, the...
It's just like yesterday when you didn't even bother to respond to my question about your assertion that the thread-starter had in mind your misunders...
Stop being intellectually dishonest, please.. The way to answer the question I asked is by saying, "The dependence on conscious awareness in the examp...
The question I asked you was "where is the dependence in the example I specified." Answer that question please--instead of taking a step back and doub...
Yes, I'm completely serious. It pops out of existence, as I stipulated, completely coincidentally when we happen to not look at it. So how is that dep...
I wrote "popped out of existence" so there's no ambiguity if you actually read what I wrote. Realism has nothing to do with believing that objective t...
Not necessarily. Assume that things like toasters exist and that they're not just mental phenomena. Now, let's assume that the toaster is separated fr...
Yes. That is not the same thing as "they continue to exist when we're not aware of them." That's because logically, things can exist that are independ...
Which does NOT say anything about the issue of whether things exist when one isn't observing them. That's the conventional definition, which is consis...
Couldn't agree more with this. In particular what bugs me is when people assume that any behavior or characteristic needs to be evolutionarily advanta...
From Wikipedia: So yeah, per that definition, which is the sense of "absurd" that Camus was using for example, the absence of objective morality or me...
One would guess so, but I think that both professional and serious amateur philosophers tend to be "bigots" (in the way you're defining that) and egoi...
"Bivalent logic" as someone else pointed out. That's the name you'll run across more often in a philosophical milieu. Anyway, "What's wrong with it?" ...
First off, that's not at all the subjective/objective distinction that I make. I also believe that "exists even when it's not being observed" is not a...
It does, because it's no inference. It's an observation. Inferences are not observations. Not that that's all that I typed, but it's enough for the mo...
You lost me a number of times in your opening essay, but the part I was most confused about was this: At first I read that as if you must be talking a...
It seems like there's a major increase in idealists/should-be-solipsists-if-you're-to-be-consistent folks running around on philosophy forums lately ....
First, I wouldn't say that the cogito employs some narrow sense of "think" so that simply being aware wouldn't be sufficient to count as thinking. Sec...
Comments