Remember that I don't even think that talking about "nonphysical" things makes any sense, but I'm trying to pretend that it could make sense. If it ma...
"Timeless change" is a simple contradiction on my view. Time simply is motion or change. If you're saying that God is timeless, then god can't formula...
How do we know that? You're stating it as if it's just a given, or as if it's a logical principle--and it does need to be stated that way if it's goin...
Being "outside of time" wouldn't imply anything about creation or destruction. It would only imply something that can't move/change at all as long as ...
Cool. I was just wondering. I know sometimes when Dennett talks about this stuff he also sounds as if he never makes "random" decisions, but that coul...
I think it's because he has the aim of arriving at a particular conclusion (a religious conclusion), and the arguments are basically ad hoc means of g...
That's the claim you're supposed to be supporting. It's not at all a given. To use the arboreal example that's so popular, let's say you see a tree. P...
As always, by the way, you either have something existing forever or you have something spontaneously appearing "out of nothing" so to speak. Neither ...
Well, just in the sense that if there's not a prior state of x, there can't be a subsequent state of x, sure. That's because of what "prior" and "subs...
Who is "everyone else"? If you're referring to Hacker and the reddit stuff, those don't make any sense either. (As I noted in my post above.) Or are y...
I'm not talking about things that are hidden or unknown/not conscious. Are you telling me that all of your conscious thoughts, imaginings, feelings, e...
Yeah, although I wouldn't say that regularly asking oneself, "Is this correct? Why is the author claiming this? Is it well-supported? Is the author cl...
The whole reason that I wrote "seem random" and "where we're assuming that dice-rolling gives us random results" is so that we wouldn't go off on a ta...
That's not a tenet of solipsism and it doesn't follow from anything. Consider thoughts you have, things you imagine, ways you feel, etc. Aren't they s...
I was just interested in whether from a phenomenal perspective Relativist doesn't make some choices that seem random rather than always thinking about...
Sure you can, because it's not different independent of looking at it, at least from the point of reference in question, and there are always points o...
Don't you make any decisions that seem random, where you have two or more options you like equally, so you do the mental equivalent of "rolling dice" ...
So you're not positing nonphysical properties of some nonphysical substance, but nonphysical properties of physical substance? (Remember that I'm aski...
It would have to be some sort of substance, object, etc., no? Even if you're positing nonphysical objects, substances--whatever that would be. Otherwi...
How about this part: "properties have to be properties of something. Do you agree with that?" (This is why I usually try to not type more than one thi...
You asked how I'd feel if strong determinism were true. I told you how I'd feel. I'd feel no differently, because I could just choose to ignore it. I'...
You're confusing different ideas, seemingly based on a weird "literal" reading of "seeing things as they are." No one is saying that we see "everythin...
That's what it would mean for strong determinism to be true. What I'm pointing out is that it's irrelevant, because phenomenally, it seems like I can ...
Ontological solipsists are saying that they definitely know something. They're not saying that knowledge isn't possible. What ontological solipsists k...
There must be someone who can write clearly, in a way that makes sense, that has some sort of logical flow to it, and that doesn't seem ridiculously m...
I'm not a fan of a lot of the moral tenets of the major religions. I don't have a problem with every tenet, but I disagree with a lot of it. The relig...
Yet another "Huh?" response from me. A lot of what you wrote seems bewildering to me. The first question, I suppose, is why are you conflating solipsi...
I was partially joking, partially making a serious point. Whether strong determinism is true or not, things are just as they are now. As things are no...
This doesn't make any sense to me. If any gods exist, their existence didn't hinge on whether we were aware of this. It's just like Pluto existed long...
Huh? I'm not following you, really. The point I was making is that properties have to be properties of something. Do you agree with that? Sometimes I ...
That wouldn't be the answer to where anything is located or what substance it's a phenomenon of, because it's not a location, and it's rather itself a...
Again, I was just trying to clarify something before moving on. Next, I'd want to clarify that you agree that consciousness would have to be propertie...
Sure, depending on your aims. All I was saying is that the dividing line simply tells you about how people formulate their concepts, how they use word...
Right. At the moment I'm just trying to clarify whether you agree that all physical things "have" various properties. Because it wasn't clear to me on...
Wait, let's say that there are no people, just to make sure that we're taking perception, mentality, etc. out of the picture. Don't you believe that a...
Why, though? Why would you start talking about language when it comes up? You could just as well talk about the factory where the oven is made, the tr...
Comments