So two acts must be spatially and/or temporally identical in order to be morally identical? In order to claim that two acts are not morally identical,...
Right back at you one more time. Laughably false, as I have demonstrated over and over. I will not bother to go back and quote myself again; as someon...
Here is what I actually said: Arguments cannot be settled solely on the basis of rational intuitions, because they are not uniform; different people h...
Mathematics in general does not require a "foundation" at all, and certainly need not be treated as Platonic, as if its objects "exist" in some immate...
Fitness for the office is up to the judgment of the voters. Evidence sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the commission of "Treason, Bri...
The relevant language is not in a mere statute, it is in the Constitution itself; and it does not say "high crimes, misdemeanors, and other," it says ...
Mathematics is the science that draws necessary conclusions about hypothetical states of affairs. Pure mathematics does not concern itself at all with...
Indeed. Should we reveal the big secret that in any valid deductive argument, there is nothing in the conclusion that is not already entailed by the p...
It was quite obvious all along that my statement entailed the negation of your #1, and therefore the negation of your conclusion--i.e., the unsoundnes...
Nixon resigned before he could be impeached. Clinton was impeached for perjury--lying under oath, which most people agree qualifies under "high Crimes...
The only Republicans who matter are those in the Senate, and how they personally feel about Donald Trump is a relatively small part of the equation. U...
Impeachment is not a finding of guilty nor a conviction, it is merely a formal accusation. The House is the equivalent of a grand jury, ascertaining w...
How many times do I have to repeat that I deny your #1 because I reject the definitions of terms that it presupposes? Here is my deductively valid arg...
I agree, there is a sense in which the House has the power of impeachment for any reason. However, the OP calls for "removal of a government official,...
That seems like a response prompted by emotion, not logic. I am simply pointing out the constitutional requirement for removal from office. Unless the...
I agree that Donald Trump is an immoral, dishonest, and obnoxious person. However, none of the items that you mentioned--even taken together--qualify ...
No more so than your definition of "valuable" as "being valued." As I keep pointing out, the debate is not about the arguments, but the premisses--in ...
Yes, and we call that process an election, which will take place in just over 13 months. Public dissatisfaction with the President's performance, no m...
No, for something to be intrinsically morally valuable is for it to have that property regardless of whether anyone actually values it at all. No, the...
No, as I have pointed out repeatedly, you have presupposed that by defining the terms accordingly. An objectivist maintains instead that some things a...
There is indeed a difference between "real" and "existing" in metaphysics, but this is not it. I find Charles Sanders Peirce's definitions especially ...
Cantor wrongly thought that the real numbers constitute a continuum, but as I noted previously, they can only constitute an infinite collection--one w...
There is no "proof" in induction, only evidence. Induction is really the last step in inquiry, although it is ultimately cyclical. First is retroducti...
Lots of people believe things without justification that happen to be true. That is why the standard modern definition of knowledge is justified true ...
I agree with , in the sense that a deductive proof can only ever provide certainty about a hypothetical state of affairs. Whether any given hypothesis...
No, justification is about why someone believes a proposition, while truth is about whether that proposition represents reality. Besides, if justifica...
If I rejected your argument by simply claiming that I could not make sense of it, what would be your response? I am confident that if I were to constr...
Nonsense, that is not what it means to be an objectivist. Rather, as I have stated repeatedly, an objectivist rejects #1 because "being valuable" does...
Not at all. As I said, what begs the question is a premiss that already entails the conclusion by itself. A proper syllogism requires both premisses i...
Anything that one premiss entails by itself, without the addition of a second premiss, is effectively asserted by it. With that in mind, consider the ...
It depends on how we define "moral values." If we mean values that have a moral aspect, then certainly some of your values and my values are moral val...
In that case, the entire argument seems unnecessary. Everyone presumably knows that you and I are not Superman, and I doubt that there are very many p...
As usual, the debate is not about the validity of the reasoning, but rather the truth of the premisses. The truth of #2, and thus the soundness of the...
Excellent, and I agree with you that justification can be based on the absence of counterexamples. It is what Charles Sanders Peirce called "crude ind...
"Proof" has the connotation of rigorous demonstration. We believe all kinds of things for which we do not have "proof" in this strict sense, but we ne...
You are still conflating justification with truth, and consequently ascribing views to both of us that we did not state and do not hold. Proofs are su...
No, a proof is sufficient but NOT necessary. A true proposition is true regardless of whether humans ever construct a proof for it. One more time: a p...
No, my question demonstrates that a proof is not necessary for a proposition to be true. It is self-refuting to claim otherwise, unless you can provid...
I have tried having polite discussions with you in this and other threads today, but you have promptly and persistently resorted to baseless assumptio...
How do you know that, if the ball was always on it? Maybe that is just the natural shape of the cushion, and the ball has nothing to do with it. Suppo...
Indeed, immutability is one of the standard attributes of God in classical theism. Of course, treating God as a "subject" and a "mind" is rather anthr...
I think that the argument as formulated relies heavily on the definition of "design," which probably needs to be stipulated. If "design" is used in a ...
If the cushion has always been indented, then it is not being indented, it simply is indented. No, not if I knew that the cushion had always been inde...
Comments