What I got out of it is that (a) we're assuming that (objective) facts exist, and (b) that the fact that objective facts exist is sufficient to imply ...
Yeah, the claim comes down to something like "It's a fact that we ought to believe facts" or "It's a fact that if there are facts, then there is an im...
True things are propositions, not facts. Truth is a property of propositions, which on some accounts, obtain that property via corresponding to facts....
Validity obtains when (1) It's impossible that premises are true and/or (2) It's impossible that a conclusion is false, or (3) If the premises true, t...
I agree with you that meaning isn't objective, but "importance," "what's interesting," and "what makes x so special" certainly aren't objective. The c...
Hence why I asked you to give the reason that you're using the word "futile." If the reason isn't that evidence is in the eye of the beholder, then do...
Saying that it's a fact that there's a 50/50 probability that a coin lands on heads or tails is saying that coin flips really are random . . . which i...
If you're looking on Amazon (re their "Look Inside" feature), here's a trick that often works. The "Look Inside" books have a search feature. Utilizin...
Well, and also we need to observe the difference between: (1) It's true that that we ought to believe facts (2) It's a fact that we ought to believe f...
That sounds closer to Jung's "collective unconscious" than pantheism. It sounds like you think there's something a bit more robust than Jung's idea, b...
Another factor could be that publishing polling results influences how people vote and just who votes in an election. If someone is consistently winni...
Right, my view is different than this. I'd have no crime of conspiracy if I were king. I'm not sure what you're asking there. It seems basically you'r...
So "everything is the collective sum total of individuals"? (I'm an atheist, by the way, but I'm just looking at this under the umbrella of a view tha...
Could you answer the question I was interested in: "Let's say that Joe says that the concept of God has utility and Betty says it does not. How do we ...
Correct. I have no complaint against you. The responsibility is with the person who chose to shoot me. My answer here should already be clear from wha...
Too many questions to answer all of them in one post. Re physicality, location, "where it goes," etc., another analogy that's useful is that it's like...
I'll bypass for a moment whether I agree that evidence in the case of God is in the eye of the beholder, because what I want to focus on is why you'd ...
How about trying to support how it would be a fact (of what? what would it be a property of? etc.) that we ought or ought not do anything? ("I'm claim...
Try it this way. Is there a way to not simply be making a value judgment about it (about the question, or alternately phrased, the claim that we're ta...
Nope. It's empirical. All evidence we have, which includes imaging, studies of brain injury patients, etc. suggests that all mental activity is a brai...
I read your whole post, but I like to focus on one issue at a time, because that's a constant desire of mine, for folks to focus when we're doing phil...
If the issue is "continually inviting a question," then continually inviting a question should be absurd regardless of the question, for any argument....
So the issue isn't continually inviting a question, but something else. Re your comment here, if we're saying that it's not true, it's not a fact, tha...
Will is the mental phenomenon of us controlling or directing both other mental content, including decisions, as well as actions. As such, it's located...
First, "Continually inviting a question" is sufficient for "absurd"? What definition of "absurd" are you using, then, and what does it have to do with...
It has a bearing because there can be a fact where "we ought to believe it" is not the case, which makes the argument invalid logically. An example is...
Whether you're using "significance" in the "meaning" (semantic) sense or in the "importance" (value) sense, both are assigned by individuals, with pot...
Referring to something different, where Rorty was actually doing phil of language, would be another matter of course. However, re this: The second par...
So imagine there are no people. There are facts, of course. What would make it an objective fact in that situation that those facts ought to be believ...
I already gave you the clear objection. Facts in no way generally hinge on us or anything about us. There would be facts if we never existed. If we ne...
But that's not philosophy of language, it's epistemology (and implicationally phil of perception). I'm very familiar with representationalism and its ...
Obtuse? this is as simple and straightforward as we can get while still doing philosophy. Imagine the following. Someone gives this argument: P1: Fact...
Comments