Isaac

I see. So you might say "that's not how memory works" and some of that discomfort is because what's being proposed doesn't cohere with what you've lea...

Aren't I just. There's more to an explanation than a kind of sub-level of more foundational grounds. I agree with your complaint about reducing presup...

...seems at odds with... Is it that you are a little sure of what kind of entity the mind is? Something in the ballpark of the sort of thing unlike du...

Uh huh. The question was why associating the meaning of the word 'truth' with a pragmatic concept of utility caused this increase in deception. What d...

I understand that, but why would mere observations even need to cohere? There's no less a gap between, say, my experience of time passing and the actu...

Thanks. I know people are concerned about this derailing the thread, so I'll be brief, but wanted to at least respond. The question I really wanted an...

Then we'll leave it there. Thanks anyway for the reply.

Oh, and one last thing. About the status of 'the mind' in the world. Real entity or not? Because each of you seem quite strongly realist about worldly...

I find this exchange baffling and I wonder if you'd each indulge me in explaining a couple of the presuppositions you're working from. You seem to be ...

It wasn't a rhetorical question. How so?

Ha! Not heard that one. I'd be lucky, though, if '47' were one of my options... Might make it to 4.

Something like that, I expect. It sounds like the sort of thing I'm prone to saying. I shan't bore everyone with a repeat in that case... I might star...

Hey, you've no need to explain yourself to me. You crack on in whatever way you see fit. It was a post for my own amusement.

Just joining in this new trend of quoting one's self rather than one's actual interlocutors. Quite satisfying.

The objective seems unclear here. What would a model of language be outside of discussion about what idioms (among other expressions) mean? Earlier yo...

And the problem with that would be...?

... There's much at issue here, but this first. You've gone from what ought to be the case, to what is the case. Your claim (correct me if I'm wrong) ...

...is, I think the only appropriate response! But maybe I'm just getting old and curmudgeonly. I eagerly await the new era of social justice heralded ...

It's not about 'getting through' to people. People rarely modify their behaviour based on rational argument. If they're going to dig their heels in, t...

As I said in my earlier response to you...

Difficult to answer simply (as I suspect is the case for most people) broadly old-school socialist probably fits the bill best. Yeah, I agree with tha...

Yes. Why? They could educate themselves, do their due diligence with regards to sources, do the work required to join the discussion in question. That...

Well said. If one is free to say "global warming is a hoax", then I'm equally free to say " this person is a moron and we ought not entertain their vi...

That's an interesting idea. I'm not sure how it would flesh out, but might be fruitful line line of thought... But this a feature, not a bug. As said ...

Join what? Race struggle is primarily of economic origin. Oppression was class oppression, literally about an economic transaction (slavery), at first...

Why would it be on the white, male, working class to bring about this solidarity? Are other members of the working class exempt from such a duty? Or a...

Maybe. But I can say that Jabberwokies are tall hairy creatures with purple noses. I can instil in your mind the notion that one might reach for the w...

Yeah, sure. I fear we may well be on our own in such an interest, but I feel the same way from the other side (how the theories of cognitive sciences ...

I think it's an argument about what concepts are, not whether we need them. Ha! You'd have hated my theories of 20 years ago. I started out research i...

Really? "If a thing is a 'jabberwocky', you ought throw jelly at it." Don't you now know how to treat something as a jabberwocky? (Ie throw jelly at i...

Can't please anyone round here can I? Too idealist for the hard-nosed realists, too realist for the hard-nosed idealists... You're giving it's being b...

...then why ask Marvin? Surely he knows that in doing so he can only be asking Marvin's opinion about the barbarians... which Marvin has already given...

I think I probably gave mine earlier, but... I don't see any mechanism by which we could possibly investigate (or draw conclusions about) what 'truth'...

What does 'logically true' mean here?

What would render a world impossible? Are possible worlds all those which are allowed logically? If so, how does one express the possibility of one ha...

I don't. How so? I see. So the lava baby's mother should perhaps just carry on. After all, who can tell what will happen in the future? It's such a my...

Ha! Suspicion of the emphatic, those who have to proclaim they are the truth tellers. I like it. It goes nicely with my suspicion of those who divide ...

Yet you've not demonstrated that to be the case within the context of this discussion. This discussion is about what 'false' means. "What is truth?". ...

I don't think anyone is claiming truth and belief are the same (nor can I really see any cause to think they might be). When people say something like...

We already have. We've argued this point before. You dodged having to concede either that it was good, or that your philosophy was essentially selfish...

Cutting a tree down does not force a log to become a log, I don't impose my will on the log, I impose my will on the tree, I force a tree to become a ...

I have no idea what you're blathering about. The baby born into a lava pit was burnt alive in lava. I'd say that's something done to it. The parent, k...

What?

No, they are referring to truth. If they are understood, then that's what the word means. There's no god-given dictionary, and if there were it's cert...

As written we can't 'all know' full well when it's not true otherwise there'd be no disagreements about that. There are. There are relativists, there ...

Understanding begins to dawn, I think... Work beckons, but this is good. Thanks.

Nonsense. This would imply that there's never disagreement. It's abundantly clear that in most cases where the word 'true' is used, we do not "all kno...

That may be the case (I'm not in a position to argue logic with Tarski - though I will say that unless he has universal agreement, then it sets out ho...

It seems you're answering the question "What is truth?" from a position of already holding that truth is not analysable. That's the third position I l...

Indeed, but I must a) still do the translations, and b) more importantly, still believe that what we discover about the brain constrains our metaphysi...