I tend to be a positivist about these kinds of questions so I would say you have a right if and only if there exists a law (and/or an interpretation o...
Right, IF her past had been different, she would have been raised in such a way as to potentially care and emphasize moral values. However, in the sce...
I don't think temporality is any more implied in the formalized LNC than it is, say, in the proposition that "2+1=3". You could read this to say somet...
Well, killings during war are kind of a separate issue since it gets you into questions of just war theory. The basic idea being that if you accept ki...
It seems to me that you and @"Tzeentch" might benefit from distinguishing b/w "murder" and "killing". Presumably all murder is immoral, but that isn't...
The argument in the first place was related to the above where you appear to identify objects with dynamic interactions, in effect signaling that what...
Well, maybe in some sense, yes. Here's the reasoning: 1. To be dynamic is to be in motion. 2. Motion is defined as an objects change in position from ...
Maybe, I wasn't making any claims about either evolution or morality being in error, only that the attempt to find an analogy b/w the theory of biolog...
I'm not sure it's really all that important but at the most general level I use it to distinguish things from other things that are not physical. That...
Above is a definition of what I take motion to be: change in an object's position over time. I don't see anything in the definition that commits one n...
Of course temperature relates to or "deals with" physical stuff. That doesn't in any way imply that temperature itself is physical (I mean, it might f...
I wasn't asserting anything, just trying see where your belief that molecules are categorically not hard stems from. Claiming that you think numbers a...
I think it would be more accurate to ask whether referring to names that reference fictional entities as "empty" constitutes a category error. And, as...
If you think all that stuff is physical, then do you think hardness is a possible predicate/property/etc. of all physical objects or just some or none...
What you're suggesting isn't necessarily wrong, it's just unnecessary and inefficient. Math already has enough goofy notation for people to keep track...
If someone did that, they wouldn't understand properly what a limit is and would be trying to get out of it something which it doesn't purport to be a...
Like I said above, it might not be a scientifically interesting question, but it's not a question that implicates a category error. I still don't see ...
I don't see there being any real epistemic issue (over and above issues with epistemology generally) as long as one understands that what it means to ...
If you could provide an example of such an error that would make discussion a little easier. I tend to think several centuries of people successfully ...
It's a defined concept so the only way that it might be "incorrect" is if someone introduced a concept that fulfilled a similar role that had better c...
I think I basically agree with you. If one is working with a theory of naming based loosely on the notion of a Kripkean rigid designator (which I am) ...
The idea was just that there are long standing and, I believe, unresolved and unresolvable criticisms of any social evolutionary theory because of the...
Don't know, maybe it's inability to permeate other molecules? The point was only that it's not inherently non-sensical to ask the question in the same...
There was a relatively popular trend of "social Darwinism" shortly following and capitalizing on the popularity of Darwin's theory of natural selectio...
Yes, sorry, I did misquote, but still don't think it's a category error. It doesn't seem to me impossible to assess the hardness of a molecule in the ...
not at all. Of course, they are not properly "names" for the correspondence theory I'm thinking of so not technically empty in the first place, but I ...
1) I guess I didn't find @"andrewk" 's post really clarified much. On the contrary, far from being a category mistake, meanings are exactly the kinds ...
It might be helpful to treat the 2d definition as essentially analytic. In other words, what a "substance" is in the context of defining an "element" ...
Generally I don't have an issue with your claims about how syntax can operate with proper names, and even think the type/token distinction could be us...
It looks like you're trying to prove a substitution lemma, or something involving the substitution lemma (I'm assuming I understand the notation you'r...
You're right that we can't be certain about anything, that includes our own existence and, a fortiori, any meaning that attaches to it. The reason for...
two points: 1) the gist of naming and necessity is that Kripke argues that you can have analytic a posteriori truths. His famous example is the claim ...
I'm not sure the example gets to the difference between type/token and proper names. It seems to me that both speakers there are using proper names. t...
1) Doesn't the description for Frege just unpack into the referents? That's the whole point of the "morning star" example, isn't it? So in the case of...
The claim that does not seem correct. There is nothing inherent in the definition or concept of a truth table that identifies it as being anything oth...
Ferreira is generally correct. The problem with your "proof" is in line 1. There is no rule of replacement or inference that allows the move from (D -...
Comments