Isaac

A morally justifiable 'evil' is an oxymoron. If it is necessary to achieve a moral end then it is, by definition, the morally right course of action. ...

So? I don't see the relevance. No-one here is suggesting that the neuroscientific data gathered is interpreted in real time as it's being generated. E...

Not at all. There are many ways of thinking about what is 'right' that would lead to taxes being the 'rightful' property of the government. I think, f...

You could, but I'm not the one implying that some things are 'rightful property' and others aren't by some mystical external means. Property is define...

How are you concluding that? What method of establishing who has a right to what are you applying? Your original suggestion was in the context of... A...

You don't need to argue that the state "rightfully owns everyone and everything" to support that it can rightfully take money for its own benefit. Do ...

The government doesn't coerce with the threat of violence in the case of taxes though. It deters. The money rightly belongs to the government. It is u...

Yep. And? I'm not sure what point you're making here. It's still the case that science is based on a corpus of such data. It's still the case that suc...

Hence my accusation of historicism. That science did develop from philosophy tells us nothing at all about the necessary relationship between the two....

I actually think most people do not choose. Take religion as an example (I know it's not exactly a theory of utility, but it is in the 'get to heaven'...

It doesn't just get truer if you keep repeating it.

No, I don't suppose you would be. I don't suppose you're aware of your kidney's functioning either, but that doesn't mean they don't. again, what you ...

The point is it is using the CPU to report data about the CPU. That's all. It's presented only in opposition to the claim that we cannot use a model t...

So philosophers then? Yet it was somehow the height of illogic for me to suggests that scientists invented science? If you can show some general progr...

Go on then.

None of Lorber's patients had no brains. So not then. And how exactly does it lower the probability? If have a smaller car than usual does that lower ...

I do. The signals are invariant, but the structures we generate with them (the models) are themselves socially constructed yet, being based on the sam...

You can't just make this shit up. If you want to discuss philosophy, discuss philosophy, but I get really pissed off when folks start discussing empir...

Yes, flitting between 'you' (meaning the entity producing self-reports) and 'your brain' (meaning that which neuroscientists can see) is an activity p...

To a degree. The only thing I'd say is that I don't consider the 'thing in itself' to be beyond our reach. I think a model is us reaching it. There's ...

So? Is this not doing exactly that? https://developer.android.com/studio/profile/cpu-profiler

Maybe, but that's not the same thing as thinking. Otherwise "I'm thinking of a word" wouldn't make any sense.

And yet we needed to call in specialists to invent science?

Inner dialogue is talking, no?

I'm not a computer scientists, so if there's some technical issue I'm unaware of then maybe this would be difficult, but I can't see the intrinsic bar...

Who invented philosophy then?

I don't think we necessarily need do anything instead. We're pretty good at thinking, using all sorts of methods. If there's a mistake, I think it mig...

Historicism without a shred of evidence.

No you don't. You think and wonder using neurons. You talk using language. It obviously does. That doesn't mean it's the only way to talk about it. Bu...

Right. So they influenced themselves? Point is, just because someone wrote something down is insufficient to say anyone after then has been 'Influence...

I don't see what that's got do do with the metaphor. All I'm saying is that computers can use their internal calculation mechanisms to report the stat...

That wasn't the part of your response I quoted. You compared two things. Only one of them was computer architecture.

Are you planning to support that, or was it just for me to add to my collection of 'things Frank thinks'?

Scientists discuss theory with Popper, they're "influenced by Popper". Popper discusses theory with scientists he's not "influenced by scientists"? Or...

Does it matter? If we're not really arriving at our beliefs that way anyway, then we don't really need an answer to that question. Yes, indeed it does...

Refuting. The activity, not the status.

Yes. They're both things you do unconsciously. You may have a conscious feeling of having initiated them (you could even have your 'free-will' version...

Spot on. 'Reasons' are mostly post hoc narratives to explain to ourselves, and others, why we believe what we do. We'd no doubt like to imagine they'r...

And that's a one way system because...?

Interesting. So what was the mechanism by which a scientist becomes influenced despite neither reading, nor being constrained by the writing in these ...

Probably. But none of that has anything much to do with whether he had an influence on scientists. Although my absolute favourite is from Paul Dirac

I'm not sure what you're referring to by 'this'. None of the process is consciously thought, no. You're only aware of the result. Not following you he...

Yep. It always baffles me that this this is seen as some coup de grace. "But the study of social constructs is itself just a social construct", "You'r...

Because you're claiming it is something private, yet identifiable. I'm refuting that claim, so the next step is for you to present your alternative. I...

Perfectly possible. As is its opposite. They might also have been influenced by Kant's house-cleaner.

It's like you've never encountered the use of questions before. Do I really have to explain this to you? "I've not been outside today" - "Then how com...

Absolutely. Model-dependant realism I've heard it called. I doubt It's much influenced by Kant though. The majority of scientists I know just tend to ...

Well then how did you acquire the field, if not from the common? By what means was the water kept clean, if not by the efforts of others upstream? By ...

Right. But I answered that. You're wrong. There are not two ways. Ignoring it doesn't make the error go away.

What reasons? You've not stated any reasons why some are entitled to the products of their labour but others aren't. What are these distinguishing fac...