It (meaning, mental content, what have you) is a game of pretending that words and pictures refer to things (externally, not in the head). We're just ...
Not that we should assume there would automatically be some awful problem if it did. But, It's a game of pretend. There won't be any fact of the matte...
They are similar, in admitting of the same crucial change in perspective as urged by Goodman (the "see also" on the Kripkenstein page is no accident) ...
It might be. We would have to be careful not to confuse use and mention in fleshing it out. But I get that you don't think you are headed in that dire...
That may seem clear during the phase of the game where you are confident in asserting, Later, perhaps trying to square this with the fact there are no...
Only one, really, and it soon straightens out. Usually, the speaker equivocated between denying that the reference was (directly or indirectly) to wor...
At best: sublime readability, and a mission to dig as deep as possible (though not deeper). At worst: bluff, imperiousness, charlatanism, guruism, pre...
:rofl: "... an' they catch 'im... an' they say e's mental!!" I think that final gem is the culmination of the speech by the boy pictured (used earlier...
If you clicked the first link, what did you hear? Perhaps the stimulus was too noisy, literally. Anyway, just sharing some lovely (perhaps inauthentic...
There's a YouTube link in my psyche. Can't insert it here as media so that it starts at the right place, but https://youtu.be/rLmMchi2aAQ?t=220 The so...
No, over the thread. Just pointing out that absolutism has a non-cosmic variety, from which point of view correctness is absolutely achieved, and your...
Good absolutism is recognising that within a language game there is often no choice between this and not-this. For example, the puzzle, requires a ben...
Of course. Exactly, if for some reason you want to label the RAA line "P" rather "~P". In a line properly signposted as RAA, and in a discussion in wh...
Sure, but yours begins (read as a proof by contradiction) by denying a more specific claim of failure of surjectivity: the claim that such sets as, in...
Is that a thing? Ok. But @"TonesInDeepFreeze" doesn't appear to be eschewing proof by contradiction, instead merely proving (still by contradiction) a...
Not if you hear it, for no reasons that are obvious to me, as talking about psychology. I hear it, for reasons of charity and extensionalism, as diale...
Assume, assert, affirm, hold, "believe"... whatever. Indeed. And perfectly valid. If you can't stand by all 3 lines at once, don't. They can't be a go...
Weasel. Yes they did. If they "believed, with good reason" both and , then they had deductive reason to believe . Deductive not good enough? Sure. Ded...
Ah, so not some one among several with the same domain. So worlds are not in general to be identified by their domain? That is just a nice thing about...
But unnecessary presuppositions aside... So, finally, So graph 2, i.e. ditch P1, because after all, "everything's relative", or "on a spectrum". Which...
Here (and unfortunately only here) is where I assume we more or less understand each other: I don't quite get the 'very nearly exact' but never mind t...
Well, I do hope neither of us is about to reach for Wikipedia. My point is that any such primitive measuring system is as good an example as any of th...
Sure. A 3000 year old novelty. And then the puzzle is to specify the smallest (or largest) number of microns that is no longer a cubit. No, some of us...
because it fails to endorse P2 or offer a substitute... hence the faint mystical glow of the Warburton quote, which I've probably unfairly represented...
Is this suddenly a problem? No, but in playing or describing the game we ought to respect the cases of correct and incorrect that are clear. We ought ...
Oh well, if you put it as emphatically as that, with italics and all... I honestly don't know how it seems like that, when I keep mentioning how refer...
Well of course, I would not reject a statement to the effect that a bishop can't move directly forwards, because I think using it in such a non-standa...
I kind of agree. Does it matter who asserts and who negates? Are you equating 'heap' with 'allegedly a heap' or with 'unanimously a heap'? (Or both or...
Agreed. It's partly because they insist on a distinction between and whether the word is correctly applied or not. The first question suggests a possi...
And do I take it that you disagree with the epistemicist position, that if we each recognise said threshold at different places then fewer than two of...
Of course it could just as easily start from P2 and P3, asking how you can possibly go bald one hair at a time, etc. I wasn't trying to prove anything...
You lost me. What exactly do we need to agree is implied by ? I take it to mean, simply, that there are some heaps. Not that we need to straight away ...
Well, if by 'it' you mean player 1's second line, then yes, ok, the 'signal' of a subsequent question perhaps isn't as strong as all that. You can say...
Which question? Player 1's second line here? Tell me, do you think that a single grain of wheat is a heap? No, absolutely not. And tell me, do you thi...
Ok. And does assuming a rate of flow perhaps render the tipping point unknowable, as per epistemicism? Or does it imply a range of possible tipping po...
Really? A heap of diamonds? Or (in bad taste but logical enough) of donor kidneys? Are they not suitable for the order? Challenged at least to either ...
Comments