Mww

Fun while it lasted.

Irrelevant. No way to prove it, which leaves it as mere anecdotal fanfare for the common man.

Nothing I said suggests I want anything but a critique of MY thinking, not a substitution of yours for it. You did the latter constantly and never onc...

No. You’re culpable for accusing me of it without showing how the failure manifests. Do you recognize this: first positive, first negative, second pos...

Do you recognize this: first positive, first negative, second positive second negative....

And again

Answering a question with a question, and deflection of culpability. Wonderful.

Do you understand that saying “rocks are just rocks” is a tautological declaration and not a dialectical contribution? Nobody can back-and-forth with ...

Re: philosophy-TYPE “Snobbery” rather than “preference” QED

All good. As to having no choice, it is a matter of preventing endless regression, that we have to make an assumption somewhere along the line of meth...

Agreed, in principle. Whatever is going on between the ears is under the auspices of natural law. That being said, as long as we don’t know how someth...

I think I will agree with most of this. If I were to add anything, I might say a rule presupposes a principle, whereas a habit presupposes an interest...

Pretty hard to get philosophy of mind correct, when “mind” itself is rather abstract. What would we get correct?

You philosophy-TYPES.....haven’t adopted a decent metaphysical theory and haven’t graduated to a decent enlightening beverage.

Two reasons: ego and intelligence. The first for thinking I might actually understand something so incredibly convoluted, and the second for thinking ...

Ok.

Sure I could so posit, just by negating the tenents of the extant theory. First, I’d have to have a reason for so doing, then I would have to go about...

Correct. The support is in the theory. Or, the support is the theory. And, as we all know, good theory must be falsifiable.

Assuming perception itself to be a passive faculty, appearance is what I am directly aware of. The naturally occurring information impressed on sense ...

No, because one can always think a rock without there being a rock. By the same token, it would be redundant to say I think there are rocks after one ...

Because there are no basketballs in our heads, but we know all about basketballs. The thing we know merely represents the thing we know about. A suita...

Contents of consciousness are given from the human cognitive system, operating from the brain but are not the brain. Although advocates of modern neur...

Yes. (Weird. Did you see where the C & P included the time? Made it look like I said “....impressions seconds ago.”

In dreams, that which appears is the contents of consciousness. In conscious awareness, that which appears are intuitions representing sensory impress...

Fundamentally correct; the human system is internally representative. Fundamentally incomplete: there must be something external to be represented.

Great care is advised here, because there are many disciplines listed under Idealism as a philosophical domain, just as there is in Realism. The purel...

As I said in the beginning, there’s nothing inherently wrong with thinking there would be rocks, because sentience is not a requisite for existence. T...

Hmm, yeah. Reads differently the next day. Images can be a temporal sequence without being causal, of course. The specific relation expressions by our...

I’m cool with all that.

If not spontaneity, what did you have in mind?

Dunno how reality can be all that far removed from our human experience, when we’re right smack dab in the middle of it. Actually, all our experiences...

Agreed; subjective idealism went out with continental German idealism, which advocated a necessary external material reality.

Within the context of possible experience...... Empirical truth: that of which the negation is impossible. Logical truth: that of which the negation i...

That’s always been the problem, hasn’t it? No matter how we go about trying to explain things, we have nothing with which to compare our results. As y...

This is easily reconciled if we acknowledge that experience itself isn’t the receptivity and processing of sensory data. They are the conditions for i...

Interesting. I doubt any professionals disagree with realism, but I certainly hope they don’t agree with realism exclusively. Depends on the choice of...

Always a way to simplify one’s *cognition* of causal reality? Sure there is....reduction to principles. Of which the primary one would of course be, c...

Beginning with what it may be said to do...... “...For, as the world has never been, and, no doubt, never will be without a system of metaphysics of o...

On another philosophy discussion medium, I used to sign off with “Peace”. Seems weird to see it when I didn’t write it. On Libet. Sufficiently counter...

Nahhh. Waste of time for both of us. As a practical extreme realist, by your own admission you can’t go where the depths of logic and speculative phil...

Thanks. The credibility of all proper logic and all physical theory is required to be at least internally consistent, so looks like I’m ok. If that’s ...

You’ve got the chutzpah to ask me that after killing off all my kind? For your own personal aggrandizement, no less? Kill us off cuz we’re destroying ...

Irrelevant. The OP shows no edit, and even if it did, the logical response would be the same. “Is there a rock? Yes” has the same declarative value as...

Given your impression of what knowledge is, and how you characterize what blue is, I dare not ask what you think time is. Also, given you must know ho...

“...All this means is that you choose to interpret truth-claims in a manner incongruent with how the opening post is supposed to be interpreted...” Ho...

Has nothing to do with when the truth statement was made. Has only to do with when the truth statement applies. “Is there a rock? Yes.” makes explicit...

Ok, no prob. It is true there are apt to be rocks in the future. No different in principle than believing there will be rocks in the future. No differ...

That is the predication of my whole argument: if there can be no truth statements if humans are gone, then the truth statement “there are rocks when h...

Not existence, no; that which is, is. The equivocation arises from requisites for the when, the temporality, of truth statements with respect to exist...

Motivation is falsification of the OP thesis. A substantive falsification. My two questions set the premise.