“…. Human reason, in one sphere of its cognition, is called upon to consider questions, which it cannot decline, as they are presented by its own natu...
Awww damn. I’m all warm and fuzzy inside. (Grin) Agreed; he was commenting on the inacuteness of common sense, and that they are not proper metaphysic...
Familiar, yes; studied….not so much. From that essay, though, comes one of my more seriously held cognitive inclinations, re: to believe is no more th...
Close enough, I suppose. I rather think accepting ideas and/or beliefs of others is dogmatism, which occurs when a subject presumes to advance in his ...
So be it. One purportedly missed the opportunity to be awakened from “dogmatic slumbers”, the other personifies Sisyphus with a generally unrecognized...
I wouldn’t agree with that. If I judge something perceived as offensive to my moral sensibilities, it is possible I may determine an act whereby that ...
I understand what you’re saying, but there’s a conceptual divide in place. Ontology as you intend the concept, has to do with things, what is and why,...
I addressed that very concern: the evidence that humanity in general determines good acts, is sufficient reason to think the will as good. I only said...
Exactly the way I see it. Which makes….you know….two of us. I’m a fan of metaphysical reductionism, that is, reduce propositions to the lowest form of...
Agreed. That you use satisfaction, or I use contentment, we are in principle saying the same thing. To be a perfectly moral agent is to act, regardles...
Why wouldn’t the son just say oh HELL yeah I’m happy!!! Being a kid, he doesn’t consider it as being given pleasure, but only being given that by whic...
We can never be mistaken about what’s best for ourselves iff we alone are the causality for it. We can be, and often are, mistaken in choosing to act ...
Absolutely. And from which arises my primary contention herein, that knowing what good acts are makes explicit you know what good is. And comes the no...
Oooo…devolution. I like that better. Aristotle = eudaimonia with or without arete, and Kantian happiness writ large, re: “…contentment with one’s subj...
Not ethically, insofar as ethics carries the implication of external authority, re: jurisprudence, and my knowledge of what is best for me merely keep...
Hey…people exploded on us. We got somebody’s attention, it seems. Was it our intellectually piercing dialectic, or were they just bored with what they...
I might expand to say that a word represents a property of actions, good is a word that represents a property of actions, quality is a property of act...
I’m aware; I left a scant two cents there a few days ago. ———- True enough. and I understand the symbiosis on the one hand and the conceptual evolutio...
I don’t know that my moral integrity remains intact until there’s a call for its exhibition. The best I can do until then, is come up with a way in wh...
No he doesn’t, but there isn’t any doubt that I am happy. If I actually feel happy in the sense of pure pleasure, seems kinda silly for someone else t...
Cool. Point was pretty easy to make, truth be told. The point of superficial happiness, mere pleasure as it were, highlights a thing that makes that f...
When I quote you, then immediately respond relative to that quote, then you respond to my response with something suggesting my confusion, I wonder if...
So I’m driving along, in this cool-as-hell ‘67 Cobra, hair flyin’, head-bangin’ to some classic Foghat turned up to 11….happy as a pig in an overturne...
So a property of a property? Red is a property of a thing and redness is a property of red? Usually, a property facilitates establishment of consisten...
Redness isn’t so much a property as the relative quality of being red. It may be that a thing has a certain redness, indicating some relative quality ...
I reject that good has properties, like most balls have a round property and gasoline has a fluid property. Good is an ideal of pure practical reason,...
I didn’t ask about goodness, and I’m not interested in meta-ethics. It seems to me you’re advocating somewhat of what you claim Moore is refuting. At ...
I think ‘finds fault’. Which is rather easy to do, when either the original is merely re-arranged, or, conditions are attached that were excluded as i...
Good doesn’t have a definition, but if you think you can build your own set of rules, you must already have an idea of what good will be. I suspect, w...
I think the math used to establish the laws that represent perceived natural relations….is exactly how we cognize empirical events. It is now called m...
It shouldn’t, in that no representation is external. As well, the brain doesn’t cognize, I do. The brain does absolutely nothing but employ natural co...
No, I wasn’t. To clarify, even if I cannot deny or affirm that it is, if I cannot know how it is, I don’t care that it is. That is to say, even if I t...
I’m not interested in what is not; I wouldn’t say reason is not grounded in the brain. I work with what I know, and how reason is a product of the bra...
You are hardly one to be imprecise. That being given, it just seemed to me, in-capable would have lent more consistency to the overall point being mad...
Hmmm. Has your position been that transcendent has to do with that by which laws are determinable, as transcending the experience required to enounce ...
Comments