Isaac

I'm not following; in what sense does this signify that they might be wrong or not? Good question. As far as I'm concerned such debates are meaningles...

The second half of this proposition is not implied by the first, and so appears to be baseless. That we have what you're calling 'metaphysical' assump...

What I was trying to pick apart was the distinction you might make between this "such-and-such moral philosophy seems right to me and so I'm going to ...

Yeah, the notion that is the theme of this thread applies here too. We're set up to be biased to extend empathy more to those who are biologically clo...

Again, same mistake as you seem to be making in the other morality thread. 'Good' and 'Bad' are not platonic ideals which we discover and then afterwa...

Yes, I think the mere existence of more than a handful of homeless is testament to the fact that it already is insufficient. Plus, I think in many cas...

So the moral philosophy you're advocating is one which seems right to you? Yet if other people advocate a different moral philosophy they're not merel...

'Moral' is a word, we use to do some job. We didn't pluck the concept out of some platonic realm and then wonder what things fit it. We already know w...

It's really not that complicated. Generation 1 are responsible for bringing up generation 2 to cope well with whatever is thrown at them. If generatio...

What would working sufficiently well consist in? Is it the extent of agreement with the answer, the extent to which you agree with it? Say, hypothetic...

Democracy, persuasion, tradition, consequentialism, virtue... It seems we have plenty. Do we need another?

So "You should drive on the left" is a moral claim?

I don't understand the question. 'Most people' refers to most people, it's a statistical assumption based on the samples that I've had the opportunity...

It's one of the funny things I find about philosophy... As you can see, I completely agree with you that truth is vastly overrated, and yet here we ar...

I don't doubt your intentions, but raising conciousness (whatever that is) is not the same as taking responsibility. That's simple... No one else made...

Your generation (my generation to an extent, I'm well north of 50) raised the very people currently taking that power away. Why aren't you prepared to...

Obviously it didn't because the generation it produced contained and supported the instititutions responsible for the very industrialisation of educat...

Objectivity (insofar as it applies to investigation) is about dealing with shared phenomena, open-mindedness is only about accepting possibilities (no...

Kohlberg's stages are about the justification for moral-type behaviour, not the cause of it. Notwithstanding that, I do disagree with a lot of his wor...

The problem with your argument is the same as the problem with any "haven't things gone to pot, weren't they better in the old days" argument. Somethi...

I don't necessarily want to get into this again, but for the thread as much as anything else, you are either very abnormal or absolutely wrong here an...

OK, thanks. Let me see if I've understood so far. You think there's utility to separating some property of propositions from some property of a person...

I think the human mind has an incredible capacity for hypocrisy. We do not, despite post hoc rationalisation to the contrary, act in a unified and con...

Let's try this. "X=Y" is true iff X=Y (your proposition), and Y={a, b, c, d}. It follows therefore "X=Y" is true iff X= {a, b, c, d}, yes? So translat...

Yes, I do (according to your terminology). That's because a suitably justified belief is what gets the label 'true' attached to it. You're wanting to ...

Yeah. We find that they no longer match the properties of the other statements in the bin (usually they no longer accord with either our experiences o...

Well, that cannot be the case on the face of it because we never know whether the leaf is green, we only ever have that it seems green and yet we very...

That's a really nicely written piece. I agree with a substantial portion of what you say, but agreement is boring so... I'm not so sure that you can m...

So - obvious question - what happens if I use the word 'spiky' for it because I'm a synaesthete and for me green is spikiness (the leaf, to all others...

OK, but I'm not sure I see how the definition you're providing here helps do that. In order to do this 'tracking' we need an algorithm of some sort, a...

I thought this might be one the main motivations. So I suppose the first question is what you see the utility being here, and I mean that in the most ...

Here's what puzzles me about your approach here. You've taken a somewhat Wittgensteinian approach to language in many other thread (maybe I'm wrong ab...

But you said everything is concious. Jack's assertion wouldn't make any sense under that definition. Jack's assertion would only make any sense if the...

Right. So back to my question then. Someone wishing to speak of their own conciousness is already concious, even by the medical definition (although, ...

Right... So rocks are concious, but things which speak aren't?? This theory is getting more and more bizarre.

But if they're speaking, they've already satisfied the original definition, so it's not serving any purpose not already met.

It wouldn't count as 'evidence' of anything. You just redefined the term to include it. If you say "subjective experience could be defined to include ...

Well then there's little point in continuing.

None of this makes it not about psychological states. There's little point in continuing if you're just going to repeat stuff we've already been throu...

What a thing is or is not prima facie is not an objective fact but another statement of your psychological state. At face value people who pray very m...

I'm not merely assuming, there are cogent arguments for non-cognitivism, it's disingenuous to try to paint one position as more refractory than the ot...

I'm not seeing the difference. The reason we call a knocked-out person 'unconscious' is because they don't appear to have those properties. When they ...

I don't know how you achieve this exhaustive binomialism without defining doubt away. How can one doubt something? It's not saying X is not the case, ...

It's not that complicated. There's an agreed on set of incorrect/harmful actions with regards to hair braiding, there's no such agreement (beyond what...

I'm not justifying or defending any of these beliefs, but you asked so... Most people seem to feel some injustice has been done to them if they've not...

I don't understand what you're saying here. My proposition was that we either discard the idea that consciousness might not be what we think it is, or...

What I'm saying is that normativity itself is an expressive act, there's no fact of the matter to be had in normativity of any sort because it's a cat...

I suspect it's more a case of them not finding the solution you are after (not you personally, the general 'you'). Much of the debate around conciousn...

I didn't make any claims to the contrary. My snipe was at the pointlessness of a thread OP which contained nothing more than "none of materialist posi...

In summary, it seems to me that you're saying 1. Let's assume that there is an objective moral right and wrong because that way we've got a chance of ...