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

Bartricks

Comments

I don't follow your point. Why would it not be a good test?
January 20, 2020 at 21:53
The problem with giving necessary and sufficient conditions for something that answers to a concept that has not been created by stipulation is that i...
January 20, 2020 at 21:50
Yes, it applies to that which can be buried. However, 'performance art' could be captured on film and the film could be dug up. Would they think it wa...
January 20, 2020 at 21:15
But you're still assessing the arguer, not the argument. Presumably if a creationist makes an argument for creationism, you're going to dismiss it bec...
January 20, 2020 at 21:12
Gibberish. You've not answered my questions. You haven't read McTaggart, have you? So you don't know about the philosophy of time (for philosophy of t...
January 20, 2020 at 21:08
Here's a rough and ready test for art that I am simply putting out there for discussion: if future archaeologists dug it up, would they consider it a ...
January 20, 2020 at 20:48
Why not just stick to assessing arguments rather than worrying whether the arguer is an expert or not? That is, why not just consult your reason? I th...
January 20, 2020 at 20:33
You've yet to present a single argument for your position. Clearly the content of the OP doesn't interest you - you don't address anything in it. And ...
January 20, 2020 at 20:15
Likewise!
January 20, 2020 at 06:54
Oh, thanks for confirming that for me! (What you actually mean, by the way, is 'phew - now I know what relativism means - thank you Bartricks for clar...
January 20, 2020 at 06:52
Again: explain how the twin example provides support for relativism about time. You have yet to do so. That is, show me that you are not guilty of the...
January 20, 2020 at 06:50
I think I've been very clear. I want to know how the twin case is supposed to provide us with evidence that time is relative. For it seems to me that ...
January 20, 2020 at 04:09
The word 'can' is ambiguous. I was talking about what is metaphysically possible, not what is medically possible. If sex is constitutively determined ...
January 20, 2020 at 02:44
What you've said isn't quite what I said. Whether chromosomal change is or is not necessary for sex change to have occurred is partly what's under deb...
January 20, 2020 at 00:00
You don't get it - the twin paradox in no way implies the relativity of time.
January 18, 2020 at 05:04
ah, so you don't really know what you're on about. Is your book written in crayon?
January 18, 2020 at 04:19
right. So we can't conclude anything about the nature of time from the example. All the example illustrates is that two people can acquire equally jus...
January 17, 2020 at 22:17
er, no. You - you- keep affirming the consequent. I have not. My arguments are all valid.
January 17, 2020 at 22:04
You are just reasoning fallaciously. This is valid: 1. If p, then q 2. P 3. Therefore q This (how you are reasoning) is not: 1. If p, then q 2. Q 3. T...
January 17, 2020 at 10:54
but again, you seem to be confusing epistemological possibilities with metaphysical ones. Two people can be equally justified in believing contradicto...
January 17, 2020 at 05:23
So this is not a point about reality, or time, but about justified beliefs, yes? When my twin travels away from me, it seems to me that he is getting ...
January 17, 2020 at 01:27
So sayeth the book of Bitter Crank (also sometimes known as the book of Total fill-in-the-blank).
January 17, 2020 at 01:21
Again, just a bunch of assertions, not an argument. They're all demonstrably false too. I take it you agree that your body was created from a sperm an...
January 17, 2020 at 01:18
Er, no. I've watched youtube videos on it and they are no different to listening to one of you - that is, they seem as confused as someone who thinks ...
January 17, 2020 at 01:11
Er, no, it really isn't. I don't see why I should as it really isn't hard to think in such terms. But anyway, I did. And then you said one was station...
January 17, 2020 at 01:07
Hahaha, so you DO think time goes more slowly in fridges?! It has been demonstrated conclusively that apples decay more slowly in fridges. The apple i...
January 17, 2020 at 00:29
Er, I did. And then you said both move. What I want to know is why physicists think it tells us something interesting about time. Because it seems to ...
January 17, 2020 at 00:26
Doesn't matter - same point applies. They both speed away and then come back together, yes? THey won't both be older than each other, will they? So, w...
January 17, 2020 at 00:16
The original set up is that one is stationary and the other travels away at a constant speed, yes? And they turn around and travel back, yes? And the ...
January 17, 2020 at 00:04
We're agreed, though, that the apple in the fridge isn't travelling through time slower though, yes? Time doesn't run slower in fridges, or faster at ...
January 16, 2020 at 23:59
I am unclear why they can't meet up. If one is travelling through space and the other is stationary, why can't they meet up?
January 16, 2020 at 23:55
But they can meet back up, yes? And if they do, are they both older than each other?
January 16, 2020 at 23:49
So, when the twins meet back up, they're both older than each other?
January 16, 2020 at 23:48
Again, one of those - mine - is an a priori truth of reason. Or do you think that it makes sense that a mental state could exist absent an object that...
January 16, 2020 at 23:08
Well done for not engaging with what I said. Has time passed more slowly for the apple in the fridge? If 'no' (and obviously the answer is 'no'), what...
January 16, 2020 at 22:34
This thread is not about whether it is good or bad to change your sex, or whether you have a right to do so, but about whether it is 'possible' to do ...
January 16, 2020 at 22:30
First, your view - that chromosomal structure is essential to sex - is implausible. And extremely implausible when applied to the issues that divide p...
January 16, 2020 at 03:00
why do you think the chromosomal structure of your cells is the crucial thing? I have no idea what chromosomal structure my cells have (I've never ins...
January 16, 2020 at 02:32
So now we're back to the "if you had your sex changed on Tuesday, it was not changed on Thursday" kind of point. That is to say, a pointless point. On...
January 16, 2020 at 02:18
That's just not true. First, nature doesn't 'decide' anything (nature isn't a person). And second, the whole point is that it is not 'disguising', but...
January 16, 2020 at 01:47
You said that sex changes are artificial - well a) they're not necessarily artificial and b) that's a pointless observation. It is 'as' pointless a po...
January 16, 2020 at 01:19
Again, more pointless observations. Me: you can change your sex. You: yes, but if you change your sex on a Wednesday, you didn't change it on a Tuesda...
January 16, 2020 at 01:06
Where did I say that? I don't think you know what the words you are using really mean. You earlier said that you cannot turn a pig's ear into a silk p...
January 16, 2020 at 01:00
That's both false and a pointless observation if true. It is false because from the fact a person's sex can be changed it does not follow of necessity...
January 15, 2020 at 22:59
They're both wrong, and you're wrong. We can change internal features as surely as we can change external ones. So if sex is constitutively determined...
January 15, 2020 at 22:53
Yes you can, it's just tremendously difficult and probably beyond our technical know-how at the moment. For with sufficient changes you could turn a s...
January 15, 2020 at 21:15
Your argument was a) not a version of my argument (you represented it to be), b) not sound, c) flagrantly question begging. The only similarity betwee...
January 15, 2020 at 21:01
You're contradicting yourself. If you can change your sex - and I've argued you can, and you've accepted that you can - then the change is not artific...
January 15, 2020 at 20:48
Argument? 'Philosophy forum' not 'arbitrary stipulation forum'.
January 15, 2020 at 20:46
And your point is? First, this thread isn't about race, but sex. But anyway, all you've done is said some things, not defended anything. The fact is t...
January 15, 2020 at 20:45