You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Mww

Comments

What could possibly suggest I’m confused? Because I don’t agree with you? Because I don’t stick to your usage? Because the authority I’m using is conf...
March 07, 2019 at 21:38
But it isn’t. Lots have done what you are doing, mocking it without refuting it. Go figure.
March 07, 2019 at 20:35
Along with Einstein, Newton, Galileo, Hawking, just to name a few. Good company.
March 07, 2019 at 19:59
LOL. There’s hope for you yet!!!! Forsake the LOOOSSERRR side and join the chosen. I’ll show the nudgenudgewinkwink secret handshake. Drop that capito...
March 07, 2019 at 19:37
Of course I’m a realist. How foolish to suppose there aren’t real things in the real world. Besides, I couldn’t explain my very own self if I denied o...
March 07, 2019 at 19:29
Do not confuse the appearing of physical manifestation of reflected light, with the conceptual appearing of the effect of reflected light. The eyes me...
March 07, 2019 at 16:04
It can be viewed that way, insofar as your order, or sequence, is correct. Nevertheless, when questions are asked about how it all happens, it becomes...
March 07, 2019 at 15:24
Understood. In CPR 1787 of course, he deleted that whole synopsis given in CPR 1781 you referenced as being incoherent. In B, noumena are give a whole...
March 07, 2019 at 14:50
Basically, in the cognitive chain, appearances come first, as an un-named object called a phenomenon, occurring immediately upon perception. Empirical...
March 07, 2019 at 14:30
This is patently false, on two accounts. Intuitions are representations, not appearances, and, appearances correspond to real physical objects present...
March 07, 2019 at 12:23
Even paradigm-shifting thinkers aren’t right all the time. I understand your critique of the Critique, and such has been argued similarly from Schopen...
March 07, 2019 at 11:47
It doesn’t. Under both currently understood physical law, and the logical law of identity, c + c = c is unintelligible. If you don’t already have it, ...
March 06, 2019 at 22:13
Ignoring it then leaves one with rationality in general and humanity in particular irreducible to a non-contradictory fundamental condition, because t...
March 06, 2019 at 19:10
Reason acts when the object is internal; reasons reacts when the object is external. In the former reason gives itself its object, in the latter perce...
March 06, 2019 at 18:35
Ok. I can go along with utility as an assessment of properties. The minor eye-brow raising I might exhibit would be over any kind of properties of min...
March 06, 2019 at 18:11
Exactly. Otherwise, we’re left with a wet noodle with the same utility as a hammer with respect to striking nails. While both can be used for it, the ...
March 06, 2019 at 16:19
But the counter point will be.....no sense can be made out of something exists but has no utility. Which may be true, but that doesn’t make it a prope...
March 06, 2019 at 16:01
I can’t see where utility is any more a property than meaning is a pattern.
March 06, 2019 at 15:40
Yes. Accounts are subjective; the something is objective because of the implication given by “witness”. Subjective: that upon which reason acts. Objec...
March 06, 2019 at 14:57
The modern idealist will say this is backwards. That which is named is always first an undefined appearance susceptible to naming. This is how that sa...
March 06, 2019 at 14:08
I loves me some cheese, boy howdy. Not so sure about that headgear though. I haven’t sat in a barber chair since cars had fins, so.....not sure about ...
March 06, 2019 at 00:29
Perused the thread; agreed without exception. 2 + 2 will equal 4 anywhere in the Universe, as soon as we get there to prove it. Or maybe as soon as we...
March 06, 2019 at 00:24
Brief opening proposition here, or send me where I can see for myself? In the words of the immortal Gilda Radnor.....never mind. Found it.
March 06, 2019 at 00:13
It better be. Mathematical expressions were initially deemed logically infallible, hence universally true. But we’d never been anywhere off-planet. No...
March 06, 2019 at 00:07
Cool. I remember seeing that expression, but I didn’t stick around. Thread name?
March 05, 2019 at 23:59
Hmmm. The thesis would begin with.....meaning is a product of reason and is no way a property of that which reason examines. The proof would take 7-8 ...
March 05, 2019 at 23:50
I’d be even happier, ecstatic no less, if you’d chalk yourself up in the “meaning absolutely requires reason” column. I’m a YankeeVirgoBabyboomer, and...
March 05, 2019 at 23:43
You’re thinking it a dichotomy but in reality they are inseparable so it really shouldn’t be thought that way. Ok, I can dig it.
March 05, 2019 at 23:38
Ok. Then how does the idealist/materialist dichotomy fit in? I just brought up subject/object dualism because it seems to relate one-to-one with ideal...
March 05, 2019 at 23:27
Are you agreeing, via shared belief, that the idealist/materialist dichotomy is false, but the subject/object dualism is not? I read for context but d...
March 05, 2019 at 23:16
D’accord. Metaphysical or ontological existence of meaning........reason. Everybody knows that.
March 05, 2019 at 21:59
It is difficult to understand because the argument is being forwarded by an intelligence the major premise denies. It does not stand to reason that a ...
March 05, 2019 at 13:10
You are correct, of course. Generally, however, it must be admitted an intelligence is required for the existence of meaning, whether the instantiatio...
March 05, 2019 at 11:53
I edited that line out to prevent the uproar sure to follow. It was put there with respect to noumena, with which I will hold in its original assertor...
March 05, 2019 at 03:00
If viewed as you said, a logical correspondence to phenomena, and as I said, an intelligible extant, then there is no meaning associated with them. It...
March 05, 2019 at 02:23
It doesn’t, actually. Noumena can never relate to any empirical relation, and noumena can be talked about. Otherwise, the word and its use wouldn’t st...
March 04, 2019 at 23:31
Answer one, answer both.
March 04, 2019 at 21:15
Simple. When is meaning?
March 04, 2019 at 21:05
Reference frames. The thought experiment grounding Special Relativity as given in “The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies” and demonstrated with mathema...
March 04, 2019 at 14:06
I’m aware.
March 04, 2019 at 13:35
Given congruent, re: similarly constructed, rationalities, if to “point at meaning” is to indicate an origin for it, or if to “point at meaning” is to...
March 04, 2019 at 12:54
It’s all good. I don’t mind being corrected, should the occassion arise.
March 03, 2019 at 18:39
Over the years I’ve been accused of over-analyzing the bejesus out of stuff, so I’m pretty sure I make my intentions with respect to those terms eithe...
March 03, 2019 at 18:22
What’s a po’ boy to do, huh? Hand-waving if he doesn’t, overstating the obvious if he does.
March 03, 2019 at 18:03
There is Plato’s ideality of forms, there is Berkeley’s subjective idealism, there is Wolff’s pluralistic ontological idealism, there is Hegel’s Pheno...
March 03, 2019 at 12:48
Don’t you just hate it when it’s presupposed about you, that you don’t know something after you’ve already rejected it? The source of the time-indepen...
March 02, 2019 at 16:00
Ok.
March 01, 2019 at 18:40
How very “Xenophan-ic” of you!! Can you spell “categorical error”? The mashed potato thing is nothing but a form of “I know you are but what am I” Try...
March 01, 2019 at 13:14
You’re welcome. Gives me a chance to show off. No..wait...I mean....(grin) Don’t sweat keeping the thread open; wasn’t up to us. There’ll be others.
March 01, 2019 at 01:28
....unless they are of the mind that such expression contains the rule, the expression *is* the rule. Anything beforehand is nothing but synthetic a p...
February 28, 2019 at 22:49