What's that Dummo? It's true. It's not false. It's true. Shall I help you out? I know what you're thinking better than you do. You're thinking "oh, bu...
And what are you on about? OP. Address the OP. And stop joining Banno in being dumb and thinking that if something is possibly true, it is true. Shees...
What are you on about? First: relevance to the OP? Bugger off and stop derailing, amateur. Second, I think the law of non-contradiction is true. True....
I don't think that's true even though I do think that sexism and sex stereotypes and homophobia is implicated in a lot of this. Subjectivism about sex...
No, I don't think so because by hypothesis those 'beliefs' wouldn't be beliefs at all. A belief is a mental state that has representative contents. An...
The credibility of a view is not affected by who endorses it - so the fact many sexists endorse subjectivism about sex isn't, in itself, evidence that...
I don't think subjectivism about sex is very plausible. But I don't see why it would be 'essentially' sexist to endorse the view (stupid, perhaps, but...
I think I am sympathetic to what you're saying. For like I say, I do think that at present this debate offers a way for a certain kind of sexist to ex...
I certainly agree with you that this is a debate where a lot of ugly sexist and homophobic attitudes have found a way of expressing themselves without...
It seems to me that whether it is metaphysically possible to change one's sex depends on whether one's sex is determined in part by a historical prope...
I am an idealist who believes in many minds, not one. For clearly my mind exists and clearly so too does God's and clearly I am not God. And I think o...
I don't endorse that view - it is an idealist form of solipsism and it is patently absurd. But if it were true, then morality would still be what it i...
Idealism is not the view that one mind alone exists. It is the view that minds and their contents exist. It is monistic not because it posits one mind...
What on earth are you on about? Here's my claim: our faculties need to have been designed to provide us with information before they can be said to ge...
kindly note that you have offered no argument for your conviction that the omni properties cannot be borne by the same person. You - you - mentioned a...
Once more: evidence is made of epistemic reasons. Those are attitudes of Reason. So, that means..........she's got control over what there's evidence ...
Once more: how does your example challenge my case? I am arguing that faculties need to be designed if they are to be capable of generating representa...
I have explained time and time again. Reason determines what's possible and what's what and what exists. Evidence is made of epistemic reasons. What a...
You should learn to listen to your betters. An omnipotent being can do anything. To be able to do anything requires being Reason, for otherwise one wi...
Garmin is designed to give you information. So how the hell is it a counterexample? I am arguing that our faculties need to have been designed to do w...
I do not understand you. You argued that there cannot be more than one omnipotent being. Bu there can be more than one. There is no reason to suppose ...
You seriously think you're in a position to tell anyone they don't understand something? Nothing you say makes any sense. Where did I say God was infi...
Right! Top marks. It doesn't have a mind. It isn't 'trying' to communicate, because it doesn't have a mind - so it doesn't have goals, purposes, desir...
Er, what? I mean, what are you on about? Reason can do anything, because Reason constitutively determines what's possible. Thus the omnipotent being w...
What one earth are you on about now? You're just flailing around trying desperately to find problems. Shall we recap: omnipotence implies omnibenevole...
It is good to know that you spend part of everyday picking up the excrement of others. This world is a prison, and you've taken it upon yourself to pu...
Oh, this really isn't hard. What is the correct analysis of why this 'message' would not be a message if I am a bot? 'But it is a message' is not an a...
It's not a possibility. There's no question you're finding this bewildering. You ask why an omnipotent being would be omnibenevolent. I tell you. I ta...
I am sure I have told you before: I am not religious. Reason. I listen to Reason. Is that so hard to understand? Psychoanalysis is not a person - it d...
There is nothing paradoxical in anything I have said. It is straightforward. It's just bewildering you, because you are so convinced there are problem...
Yes, God can kill himself. And yes, it'd be wrong for him to do so. For he disapproves of himself doing so, else he would have done it. Of course, wer...
Yes, good people don't want to control every aspect of other people's lives. Good people let others make their own choices and will offer advice, not ...
Omnibenevolence is a misleading term as it suggests 'all benevolent', when in fact it means 'all good'. So in defining God as omnibenevolent one is no...
I've done so numerous times. 1. Moral imperatives are imperatives of Reason. 2. All imperatives have an imperator 3. The imperatives of Reason have a ...
What are you on about? Omnipotence implies omnibenevolence, as I have explained numerous times. If you are omnipotent you are the arbiter of moral goo...
Comments