You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Bartricks

Comments

And what, pray, are you thinking that with, Murk?
September 08, 2021 at 01:28
Wikipedia is not peer reviewed. It's written by well meaning nincompoops who only half understand what they're confidently pronouncing on.
September 08, 2021 at 01:26
No, this thread is about the mind and whether it is the brain. And no, that's not how it works. Why are you sure about things that you know nothing ab...
September 08, 2021 at 01:26
What. Are. You. On. About? That's a conclusion: what are your premises?
September 08, 2021 at 01:22
I understand hard determinism to be the combination of two views: a) that causal determinism and free will are incompatible; and b) that determinism i...
September 08, 2021 at 00:54
I don't know what you mean. 'My method' is 'philosophy'. That is, using reason to figure out what's the case. Focus! The issue here is whether the min...
September 08, 2021 at 00:29
But you possess a faculty of reason, yes? And your reason tells you, does it not, that this argument is valid: 1. If P, then Q 2. P 3. Therefore Q And...
September 07, 2021 at 23:24
Well, that was just gibberish. Do you have any evidence that your mind is your brain? If you do, present it. Your task, should you choose to accept it...
September 07, 2021 at 23:07
I don't understand your point. There's no evidence your mind is your brain. There's lots of evidence your mind is not your brain. That's the actual si...
September 07, 2021 at 22:26
Where's your argument for this? If you provide one, I bet it'll commit the fallacy I identified earlier - that is, you're going to argue like this: th...
September 07, 2021 at 06:24
Yes. How would that work? You think that by inspecting the brain more closely you'll literally 'see' a thought? Or smell one, perhaps?
September 07, 2021 at 01:14
It's not 'my' definition, whatever that means. What on earth do you understand being 'all powerful' to involve if not being able to do anything? 'Not'...
September 06, 2021 at 06:53
Really? Well, an 'argument' is a chain of reasoning. I presented one. God is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent person. To be omnipotent is to ...
September 06, 2021 at 05:07
I don't read the bible - never have. I don't care what it says. I care only what Reason says. But you care what it says. And Jesus - whom you believe ...
September 06, 2021 at 04:10
No, thinking does not take place in the brain. It takes place in the 'mind'. Thoughts are mental states - states of mind. They are not brain states. C...
September 06, 2021 at 04:01
Yes they are. But even if they are not - and they are - it would be absurd to insist that a person who is constrained is nevertheless all powerful. Fo...
September 06, 2021 at 03:48
You're not answering the question, just caviling over words. Is there anything God can't do? If you answer yes, you don't believe in God. The answer h...
September 06, 2021 at 03:20
Destroying everything is something he can do, yes? Yes, of course. Destroying everything is something God can do - it is an action, and it is an actio...
September 06, 2021 at 02:57
God can do anything. That's the essence of omnipotence. All things are possible with God. Thus God can destroy himself. He wouldn't be all powerful if...
September 06, 2021 at 02:51
The big difference between Christianity and Buddhism is that one is built on philosophical foundations and the other is built on bullshit. The basic m...
September 06, 2021 at 02:41
I don't really see how you're addressing what I am saying. You are arguing that it is impossible for there to be nothing, yes? That's incompatible wit...
September 06, 2021 at 02:31
Your argument seems confused to me. First, the statement 'nothing exists' does not assert that something - nothing - has existence. Rather, it means t...
September 06, 2021 at 01:11
Well, a) you can't. And b) if you did, it would become apparent that your premises are nothing more than assertions as opposed to being propositions o...
July 19, 2021 at 04:01
No, you just quoted lines and insisted that those lines are just assertions when they're conclusions of arguments. And then you just made a bunch of a...
July 19, 2021 at 03:32
No, I explained why I asked you that question. Your answer will be my answer, if answer it be. What you have said so far is no answer at all. Learn to...
July 19, 2021 at 03:20
Then I don't know what you're disputing or what you're asking me. Let's recap, because so far as I can see, you're just being tedious. I believe the l...
July 19, 2021 at 01:00
Look, in my view you're a very silly person who is outclassed by my cat in terms of comprehension skills. There is clearly an argument in the OP. Quot...
July 18, 2021 at 23:09
But I don't see an objection to my argument. And it is by such means - that is, by arguments of the kind I have presented - that one comes to 'see' th...
July 18, 2021 at 23:04
No, that was a conclusion, not a blank assertion. The argument that preceded that quote - so, you know, the bulk of the OP - established it. By contra...
July 18, 2021 at 22:59
Yes, I certainly would not want to deny that our mental states can often affect - and can often affect very dramatically - the moral value of ourselve...
July 18, 2021 at 22:57
The word 'necessity' doesn't have a single meaning, and the meaning it has in 'necessary for rational discussion' does not denote metaphysical necessi...
July 18, 2021 at 22:47
I don't just think it. Don't tar me with your brush. I 'concluded' it. Big difference. You are just pronouncing. But until or unless you show there to...
July 18, 2021 at 04:57
I didn't argue that one's mental states are incapable of affecting one's moral value. I think they clearly can do. One can lose one's moral value depe...
July 18, 2021 at 04:53
I have arrived at the 'conclusion' that my mind is immaterial, based in part on the argument in the OP - an argument you have not addressed. Stop pron...
July 18, 2021 at 02:06
But the point is that you would have to ground the moral difference - that is, the vast difference in moral value between a corpse and a person - in t...
July 17, 2021 at 23:18
You seem to be attacking a straw man version of libertarianism. So, for instance, one might think, a la Locke, that the state is not entitled to do to...
July 17, 2021 at 23:11
No it doesn't. There are no insults in the OP. You did not address the OP.
July 17, 2021 at 12:04
One can know what something isn't, without having to specify what it is. Detectives would be in trouble if they had to know who did the crime 'before'...
July 17, 2021 at 04:22
Oh, okay. If you say so. I mean, they're not unique (entirely possible for two bodies to be qualitatively identical - presumably you think twins do no...
July 17, 2021 at 04:10
I don't have to, for if I can show that immaterialism is true, then I have shown that all materialist views about the mind are false. And that is goin...
July 17, 2021 at 04:06
What? No, moral value is constitutively determined by God's attitudes. So it is subjective but external. And it's not 'necessary', because God can cha...
July 17, 2021 at 00:16
Read the OP again. I do not hold the view you think I do
July 17, 2021 at 00:09
There's no argument to which you wouldn't have said those silly things. Whether we have moral value or not is not an individually subjective matter. Y...
July 17, 2021 at 00:08
okaaaaay.
July 16, 2021 at 19:54
Again, address the argument. Don't just declare things as if you are God and if you say it, it is so. Argue.
July 16, 2021 at 18:31
Your position is asserted without any argument. It is implausible (if I think I am not morally valuable, that does not entail that I actually lack mor...
July 16, 2021 at 18:28
I don't understand your point. I have argued that our minds are the bearers of moral value and that we can learn from this that our minds are immateri...
July 16, 2021 at 17:43
If roger thinks he has no moral value, it obviously doesn't follow that he actually lacks moral value.
July 16, 2021 at 17:41
No, I am morally valuable even if I don't think I am.
July 16, 2021 at 14:41
He didn't. He just assumed that there are necessary relations (precisely what I deny) and then appealed to them to try and show how the belief that it...
July 15, 2021 at 03:20