Isaac

Yes. And that's what a cup is.

So perhaps you can explain here then what the difference is between these two propositions... "there appears to be a present in which events are occur...

Why not? Why can it not be that 'red' just is a category of wave particles which cause humans, in normal light conditions with normal eyesight to have...

Mainly because I've no idea what 'correct' might constitute. I can see 'useless' (in book terms, a classification system based on paper thickness, for...

Yes, but where's the error in labelling the set which (when they interact with a certain kind of light) cause the "human vision" experience of a red c...

How so? Can some wave particles not be considered 'inside' others? Why? Why do those wave particles there cause us to see a red cup filled with water,...

Well no, because 'a person' is a label we have for an object which has properties like being made of cells, being autonomous etc. Properties which the...

How so? Our current understanding of physics doesn't seem to be incompatible with the notion that some particular collection of those wave-particles a...

OK. I'm still unclear on what you mean by 'inherent or intrinsic reality'. Can you give an example of something which isn't inherently/intrinsically r...

So? What has that got to do with the matter at hand? Which is that it is taken, in this actual case, to imply just such an obligation. It is a flaw in...

Only very recently exposed to it. A colleague of mine knows I follow the work of Karl Friston and he forwarded me this preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/...

Interesting approach. I think perhaps a lot of the time the philosopher is in the job of classifying the habits of thinking which accompany our partic...

I don't know why you think this is relevant since my opening comment on this was... ... if I could bold and underline, I would. It may just drive the ...

You can't model a figment of your imagination because there's no hidden states to infer the cause of. With your own (untrammelled) imagination there's...

This should definitely become a thing!

It's fairly straightforward... "It seems to me that X implies Y" "Yes, it seems that way to me to" "It seems to me that Z implies X" "Yes, it seems th...

But for that second sense, I can't see what process you'd be using. Modelling the cup is part of the process of seeing, so to see the model, do you mo...

You seriously still expect me to answer after the bullshit you just pulled ? If everyone disagreeing with you is 'trolling' then this is not the place...

I can see why you'd get this impression, but I wouldn't say necessarily 'rational' means. Rational thinking is a mode of thinking we use on concepts, ...

Right. So when I said... ...the correct response was just "yes". Nope. I said... 'Means', not 'equivalent to'. If you're going to try and quibble over...

Interesting. Turtles all the way down, perhaps?

OK. So does an instrumentalist have a model of the world which explains why their model of part of it works?

I see, thanks. So how does 'instrumentalist' (not a term I'm familiar with) relate to realism?

Hawking, if I recall correctly, also expressed quite a firm belief in model-dependent realism... If the views of our great scientists are anything to ...

Of course it is. I'm knowingly risking harm to others. Accelerating a ton of metal at 70mph is inherently a risk to those around me. The analogy requi...

I'm going to attempt a mass reply... @"Janus",@"Banno",@"Wayfarer",@"NOS4A2" Hopefully this clears up the position I'm arguing. If not... sorry. We ha...

You've not addressed the point. Is you experiencing a cup the same thing as the cup?

The point doesn't really require a thread. It's much as above. Either your intuitions are always right (God-complex), or everyone's intuitions are alw...

It is. We consider it fine in many contexts. Having children being one. Seeing as having children is just about the most consistent human activity eve...

Well then intuitions are not misapplied. Your intuition is that we shouldn't risk unnecessary harm on others without their consent, and you are not ha...

But that's just in you. You're claiming this about other people. How do we learn of the vague intuitions of other people? Or are you saying that the i...

I'm asking you how we come to learn of these patterns which we are to rationally assess.

How do we learn about these patterns?

And how do we gather these vague intuitions from other people?

This was not a proposition of mine, it was a corollary of what @"Bartricks" said about deserts not creating obligations in this context. If what child...

Yes, that's certainly how I see it. The matter of importance, however, is not the status of this realm in reality, but the origin of its constituent p...

Ha! I feel that way about many theories. Your use against idealism seemed apt, certainly. Idealism having it's very own peculiar relationship with the...

Personally, I think statements like this are fine, and I think so on the following ground... We can only make two kinds of propositions - those about ...

Well. In my opinion, the whole field of 'truth', and 'knowledge' is made into a quagmire by the use of a JTB definition of knowledge. To my mind, the ...

Am I wrong in thinking that this was only something taken seriously by those defending physicalism? Is it possible an idealist position actually depen...

And yet no one seems bothered by a discussion about reality which fails to even address the question of what criteria we're using to declare something...

Thanks. That is clearer. and I think it's trivially true that the knowabilty principle cannot apply to propositions about our own knowledge where know...

Thanks. Here's where I'm having trouble (gone to the SEP) Since p is a proposition (a factual claim about the way the world is) the problem seems triv...

Good. That's the argument settled then. Children deserve a good life, free from harms but no-one is under any obligation to give it them so procreatio...

Ad populum arguments are not fallacious here unless you're arguing for moral absolutism. The argument presented in the OP assumes moral intuition, hen...

What normative claim? We use people all the time. It's quite normal, we're a social species and we act as a group and expect members of that group to ...

It doesn't make any difference expressed in notation. 3 does not follow from 1 and 2. 1 says that p is possible to know (ie there exists a circumstanc...

There's you doing a cartwheel, right? There's you experiencing a tea cup, yes? The latter is clearly not the same thing as a teacup. You experiencing ...

OK, so then we're back to "why?". I don't see a way out of this. Before diving into Heidegger, I'd rather just make sure we've got the frame of invest...

I didn't think I'd have to tell you your experience exists. Do you think it doesn't? Yes. But your experienced tea cup (the one you act on, talk about...