Fooloso4

No need to stitch together what for Aquinas belongs together. I have made no such assumption. You seem to have lost the thread of the argument. You cl...

I agree. At the risk of continuing to go in the direction you would rather the discussion not go, I will point out that this is not a modern or contem...

I was wondering about the visceral reaction.

It is often overlooked how close the sophist and philosopher are. More generally, the problem is our inability to make the distinction between what se...

I have said this several times. For example: here here here here I don't recall the source I relied on though. Perhaps @"Paine" knows. The Greek word ...

I agree. Criticizing from the inside is different from criticizing as an outsider. Cryptic. Can you elaborate?

And yet, when reasoning we do not all reach the same conclusions. Quite often it is ordered toward defense or justification or persuasion, to what can...

The question is perhaps as old as man. It reflects the dualism that Socrates is responding to. Then as now the division of body and soul was common. A...

What is at issue here is not who said what. The philosophical issue is how we are to think about possibilities.

Socrates is this guy they know and love. This person they talk to and see engaged in conversation in the marketplace. What will happen to him when he ...

Yes, you can. Wittgenstein, however, is not attaching straw men. He is addressing problems that arose in his discussions with students and colleagues.

Socrates presents the problem arithmetically in the Phaedo. The overarching question of the dialogue is what will happen to Socrates when he dies. The...

PI 194 begins: and ends, as you quoted: Between them we find: Rather than give a false philosophical interpretation he is thinking like an engineer: P...

The claim that there is a difference in kind between an organism and a computer program is quite different that the claim that there is a difference i...

As I have said before, saying that a mental image of X is an image of X and nothing else, says no more than saying a physical image of X is an image o...

My point was, that would be a mistake. My mental image of the Eiffel Tower need not be an image of the Eiffel Tower. You seem to have lost track of th...

Do you conceive of, or define "you" and "we" as something?

Some years ago, when Lawrence Krauss published A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing those who are well versed in both p...

I am agnostic as to whether AI will ever be conscious. It was not too long ago that it was generally believed that a computer program and associated h...

If there is something, absolute nothingness is impossible. Last I checked, there is a whole lot of something, in fact, a whole lot of a lot of things....

Copleston is a good example of why we should not rely on secondary texts or comprehensive stories of the history of philosophy. In my opinion, anyone ...

One implication is the rejection of "kinds" in favor of degrees of difference.

No. The cost is too high. There is nothing magical about a book that assures our ignorance. We already have such books.

How is the correction between the mental image and the object to be made? In the example of the Eiffel Tower I need to become aware that the mental im...

That is what I said: But what is at issue in not simply the name of the object. What is at issue is whether the mental image must be an image of "this...

A misnomer can be corrected by linking the correct name to the object. If I am told that this object I am standing in front of is the Eiffel Tower the...

Do you mean that when they see the Eiffel Tower they are actually seeing a mental image of the Eiffel Tower?

And they would be mistaken. It is not the Eiffel Tower. The mistake can be corrected when the two objects are correctly identified.

The point of the example is that the mistake is corrected when the objects are in front of them. Before seeing them the mental image of the Eiffel Tow...

This is the desire of reason.

I am saying that the mental object is not a teapot. It is an image of a teapot. The mental object and mental image are the same thing. It is not of th...

It shows that the mental image need not be more like the object than a physical picture. The mental image is not of the object before your mind. The m...

The same can be said of a mental picture. I might think my mental image is of the Eiffel Tower when it is actually a mental image of the Arc de Triomp...

If I draw a picture or take a photograph of X, it is not a picture of anything else. Whether someone thinks it is a picture of something else makes no...

Clever turn (around) of phrase.

The point is, theology and religion do not have exclusive rights to the "domain of values".

Why would you think that (2) the physical image I draw of X may not be an image of X, but (3) the mental image I have of X must be an image of X? Ther...

A fatal abstraction.

I think the quote from Nietzsche cited above speaks to this: What matters is that things matter.

That may be true in some cases but certainly not all. Above all, it should not be framed in terms of theism vs anti-theism. For example on the thread ...

As I have said, the three claims are part of the same argument. You can separate them as part of an analysis but you need to put them back together. T...

In Proverbs we are told that fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. It is both a starting point and a terminus. The Biblical God is a willful Go...

In general I agree, it is not all or nothing. But we also need to consider what it is that one is said to be wise about. Aristotle says, for example, ...

Yes, that is my position. It is possible that I am wrong, that I do not recognize wisdom because I am not wise. By the same token, unless someone is w...

He is not speaking from on high, does not possess divine wisdom, and is not pronouncing revealed truths for us to accept and spread. To read him sympa...

Blessed are those who do God's work.

My claim is that: This is supported by reference to Plato. But if you are looking for specific reference in Aristotle by name: (Metaphysics 984b) What...

Sorry, I should have made it clearer. The quote is a continuation of the quote from the Phaedo. 97b I just edited it.

Yes, I know. That which thinks itself is Nous or Mind or Intellect. In the Phaedo Socrates says: (97b) In the Apology he says the books of Anaxagoras ...

If I remember correctly, this discussion began with PI 389 and you have returned to it more than once. PI 389 is about the likeness of mental image vs...