RegularGuy

Where are we confused? What was his point? I studied this book in college. Perhaps I can help (or perhaps not) if you will let me.

That’s why I said “with context”. Point me to a page where he says “contingent necessity”. I’m trying to help you.

AJ Ayer called the necessary truths knowable a priori ‘analytic truths’. He called the contingent truths knowable a posteriori ‘synthetic truths’. Kri...

Give me one example with context in which he says “contingent necessity”.

Good example.

Could you show me the quote?

I’m seeing some confusion in here. There is no such thing as a contingent necessity. ‘Contingency’ and ‘necessity’ are metaphysical terms that are mut...

On your view of LFW and intentionality, wouldn’t you say that the depressive thoughts cause a neurochemical imbalance?

Are you separating intentionality from the rest of experience (outside stimuli specifically)? Wouldn’t that be a fallacy?

Could you explain Whitehead’s Fallacy? I’m not familiar with it. Also, could you explain what you mean by “information is not physically invariant”? T...

I like that.

I’m afraid I am not thinking clearly. I didn’t sleep last night.

So you are saying that blue is a quality, and that it is directly apprehended? What explanatory power does that have? What kind of knowledge is that?

Also the color blue. Is what we experience of blue anything like the model of it being a particular frequency of electromagnetic wave?

So, we say that sound is the compression of air waves. Is what you experience as sound anything like the model of sound as the compression of air wave...

Perhaps that was a bad example. Sound to the mind has a particular quality. Sound as a model in the mind is air wave compressions.

Because the way things appear to the senses changes, when the physical world postulate should be constant. Our senses don’t reflect our models of real...

Plug your ears. Did the volume change?

Push in the side of your eye a little. Did your experience change?

Why do we only experience visible light through sight, and not the other frequencies of electromagnetic waves? Why do we see things that are far away ...

Neuroscience, cognitive psychology, philosophy of mind. I’m sure you’re familiar with the theories put forth by these disciplines.

You’re not getting what I’m saying. Life forms give meaning to the physical world. Without life forms, especially ones with consciousness, the physica...

No. That was just my coherent belief about the truth condition. My belief in the physical world is an abductive argument which I thought I had put to ...

The truth condition refers to states of affairs as interpreted sense data. The truth condition does not refer to states of mind-independent reality. A...

Do you deny that we have five senses?

Philosophy is fun. That’s the primary reason why I do it. I have no illusions about changing the world. As a secondary reason, I think as long as I am...

I believe a physical world is the best possible explanation for the variety of our sense data, the fact that they are able to be communicated intersub...

I was trying to make the point that brain encoding, an objective phenomenon, gives rise to mental states as an emergent property. Normatives are thus ...

Gotta go now. Be back later.

In other words, it’s our minds which make sense of the sense data. Sense data isn’t things-in-themselves.

Because I believe in the physical world. I believe we get sense data from it. But I don’t think it makes sense to speak of her as mind-independent. Sh...

No. But what she is really like independent of mind cannot be known.

My wife is still getting ready. Lol

We say we have justified true beliefs to have knowledge. But the truth condition may not refer to anything mind-independent. States of affairs are inh...

How does the truth condition work then?

Because a fact is an article of knowledge. It’s epistemic. Not metaphysical.

I’m leaving town for a few hours. This is a fascinating conversation to me, but I will have to put it on hold.

It’s not a simplified generalization. It’s a fact that the mind models the physical world. The things-in-themselves have no facts independent of a min...

So quanta are just models, but hydrogen being the most abundant atom in the universe is not a model? Or that trees are deciduous or coniferous?

No. Consciousness is immanent in the world. I’m not a physicalist. How do you explain the fact that quanta change behavior once they are observed?

A fact is nothing more than the order that the mind gives to the world. Without minds, there would be no facts.

Wrong. Without minds to make “sense” of the world, everything would be amorphous. You can’t posit a fact without first assuming a mind.

Brain states equate to mental states. I will give you that. But what is a mind-independent fact?

Remind me which question. I’m thick.

Okay. I just don’t know how you could describe anything from a mind-independent viewpoint without positing a mind. So what is mind-independent knowled...

Just take the example of a city. It is order. Minds came up with the idea, but there are physical aspects to what we call “cities”. Living as intellig...

fMRI scans in conjunction with reported accounts are observable phenomena. They are objective. That’s how we corroborate the mental activity of minds ...

Brain scans aren’t mental. But I’m sure that’s not what you’re saying?

Your stipulation was that mental states refer to the outside world truths. I’m giving an account of how that can be shown objectively.

It’s a fact about how brains work. I can look at other people’s brains through fMRI’s and the accounts they give while being scanned. Then compare it ...