Terrapin Station

Sure, insofar as other people are applying meaning to them. That would be independent of the meaning you're assigning. What does this response have to...

Is there a reason to believe that I'd say that "subjective" implies "not a part of the world"? No. It's subjective because we're talking about a brain...

No. Because I think that seeing any moral principle as a trump card (so you're falling back on it) always results in ridiculous policies. Re "unncessa...

Conditionals really aren't meant as natural language if-then statements.

Because the whole gist of it is (subjective) experience. A particular person who is conscious/who has experiences. We're talking about their conscious...

I wouldn't say there's any conventional difference between the two (and I don't use the terms differently . . . well, not that I even use the phrase "...

This isn't meant as glib, but this is why we caution that formal logic isn't to be understood by translating it into natural language. Trying to parse...

It all is eventually.

Wait--Is there some reason to believe that I do not believe there are objective processes? This is what we call a failure of communication, by the way...

That's fine, but you could imagine something and keep it to yourself, too.

I don't think you're understanding what I wrote there. For pragmatism to IMPLY a belief in objective morality, that means that one can not be a pragma...

First, literally, we must come to different meanings, because numerically distinct things can not be identical. That's just like saying that two copie...

Not just me, but everyone uses their dispositions/intuitive feelings. It can both be in response to empirical observations and in response to imaginin...

You can't literally type a meaning. You can only produce marks on a screen or paper or whatever. Those marks aren't literally meaning. They don't lite...

Pragmatism in no way implies a belief in objective morality (absolutes or not), but sure, it wouldn't preclude them. Relativism precludes a belief in ...

The basis upon which anyone makes any moral judgment is their dispositions or intuited feelings about interpersonal behavior. That's how people wind u...

I'm very behind in responding. I don't know if I responded to this. No, I don't think that it's useless. I think that it's pragmatically useful for he...

It depends on what you're referring to and how you're referring to it. The marks on the screen are objective, obviously. But they have no meaning obje...

There's no way to check anything about any model if there are no objective properties. What would you be checking? That wasn't at all what I was sayin...

I just wrote: "if I were to give an explanation or definition (per what I consider that obviously)" How would that be independent of anyone's view?

?? I said that I actually didn't give an explanation or definition. So how did I "provide an actuality"? I don't know what you're talking about. Or si...

Well, it can be morally permissible to just an individual and to no one else, or to a small sub population, say. And of course objectivists will read ...

Why are you saying "Now you are providing an actuality" then? So what?

You're not thinking that I'm someone who says, "Everything is subjective" are you?

I actually didn't give what I'd say is an explanation or definition etc. of either--I just mentioned a characteristic. I wouldn't say that a definitio...

I'm still confused about what you're getting at here. Concepts are a means of calling/considering phenomenon a and phenomenon b the "same thing"--name...

It looks like you're simply arguing in favor of a law requiring a day off of work so that people working multiple jobs have some time off without havi...

I'm confused . . . and the first thing I'm confused about is this: what the heck is a "sub" blue law?

People have a tendency online, especially in anonymous contexts, to be skeptical of any claims of achievement or status. There are a number of reasons...

What I wrote was "We could say that it was true that it was conventionally considered morally permissible." "Conventionally considered" is another way...

I don't see how those notions could possibly be derived from reason alone. You'd need empirical info. All you need to think about to realize this is t...

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. The first question seems to be about concepts where they aren't abstractions ranging over a number of pa...

"It's morally permissible to do x" is an opinion that someone can have, a way that they can feel about interpersonal behavior.

So, in a post in another thread that was a response to Artemis, I responded that a view he brought up wasn't a view that I agreed with, after he'd sai...

But my eyes just keep glazing over.

You weren't being skeptical. You claimed that there are no objective properties. Wait so now there are objective properties, it's just that the object...

Given your ontology, there's no way to make sense of "this model is right." You don't even believe that there are any objective properties. The way th...

I don't think there's a way to straighten it out for you without you sorting through the more general ontological mess you've gotten yourself into.

In my view everything has a spatial and temporal location, at least defined relationally with respect to other things. (I don't buy the idea of "space...

Aside from some extreme medical conditions, I don't think it's really possible to have a human who doesn't have a whole host of moral stances. It does...

We could say that it was true that it was conventionally considered morally permissible. That's an important distinction to make.

No stance is going to be unanimous. You just pointed that out yourself a few posts back (well, maybe in another thread . . .I don't remember if it was...

:up:

That's right. I wouldn't say I don't have an ethics, but it's not any sort of systematic ethics, sure.

That's the argumentum ad populum fallacy, and it results in saying that it's true that it's morally permissible to have slaves (if you're in the US in...

Maybe most people in most countries would agree with that, although we never actually did an empirical study to discover whether that's the case, and ...

Sure, no disagreement with that. It just doesn't make any of it true/false, correct/incorrect, etc. It's just that that stuff is irrelevant when we're...

"Classing all the cases together" is a way of talking about the concepts we formulate as such--those are abstractions that range over a number of uniq...

That's not a view I agree with. So how would it be the case that you find that everywhere in the world?

Why would you think it's by chance? We seem to have access to the world, right? Via our senses. So you'd need a reason to believe that that's not in f...