quine

Set theory is a good treatment.

Hey, This thread is about correct formulation of sense-datum statements... Don't forget about it.

See section 9 in Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind. Sellars says '(X looks red to S) = There is a class of red sense-data which belong to X, and a...

You remind me of radical interpretation. Great!

Christianity is a useless thing.

Trump believes Dow Jones Industrial Average should be decreased.

The assumption is that causes and effects occur in space and time. Descartes defines minds as not being located in space and time. According to Descar...

'Spatio-temporal' means space and time where we are. Bodies are spatio-temporal because they are extended in space-time points. According to Cartesian...

Mind-body identity theory is a better choice than dualism is. According to identity theory, mind and body occupy the same space-time point. In this vi...

It's because they are located in entirely different areas. Bodies are located in space and time. Minds are not there. They never met each other. It's ...

My argument against Cartesian dualism is formally valid. The conclusion is derived from premises.

There are various dualisms. The target of my argument above is Cartesian dualism.

Cartesian dualists are wrong because they wrongly define mind and body.

I think that it is an empirical fact.

Descartes says that the essence of mind is thinking. He claims that the essential feature of body is extension. It implies that Descartes thinks that ...

Mind-body interaction is evidence of which dualism is false. (1) Mind and body obviously interact one another. (2) If mind and body obviously interact...

Descartes defines mind as non-spatio-temporal entity. He defines body as spatio-temporal one. According to these definitions, mind and body cannot int...

The problem is not that dualism fails to explain so-and-so, but that dualism defines mind and body not to interact one another.

According to physicalism, mind is located in spatio-temporal realms. Dualists deny this view. My argument is against dualistic thoughts.

Such a thought is called 'epiphenomenalism'. Epiphenomenalism is a kind of dualism. Many philosophers reject epiphenomenalism.

'Evidence' is a tricky expression because it's ambiguous. When 'all ravens are black' is equivalent to 'everything that is not black is not a raven', ...

Only mammals are cats.

The logical form of 'there are green apples' goes as follows: (3) There exists some x such that x is green, and x is an apple. Do you think that (3) i...

'A green apple' is not related to the equivalence of (1) and (2). The logical form of (1) can be as follows: (1*) For every x, if x is a raven, then x...

I said that 'evidence' is a tricky expression. Evidence is not related to formalization. Equivalence is about formalization. Evidence is about matters...

Formally, (1) and (2) are the one same proposition. 'Evidence' is a tricky expression. Evidence is irrelevant to formal equivalence. In natural langua...

Not all evidence of (2) is evidence of (1). (1) and (2) are formally equivalent. 'Evidence' is a matter of fact. A green apple is evidence in support ...

"To be is to be the value of a variable." - W. V. O. Quine

Reductive physicalism is type identity physicalism. Non-reductive physicalism is token identity physicalism. According to reductive physicalism, the t...

Many things are logically conceivable. Merely logically conceivable things can't refute anything. P-zombies are logically conceivable. Do P-zombies re...

What makes you think so?

So, what's your objection to my argument?

It's like infinite regress of evidence.

Every human being is conscious.

Diablo 1 Diablo 2

I mean, by definition, P-zombies are non-conscious beings that are observed as conscious. The concept of P-zombies is itself contradictory. That's wha...

A P-zombie might be observed in a possible world...

Here's an argument: Everything that can be observed as conscious is conscious. Every P-zombie can be observed as conscious. Therefore, every P-zombie ...

Everything conscious can be observed as conscious. Every P-zombie can be observed as conscious. So, what do you think?

Some statements are expressed in second-order logic even though they can be expressed in first-order logic. For example, 'A supervenes on B' can be en...

How about this: (5) (?X)(?x)((Xx & (?y)(Xy ? x = y)) & Fx & (?y)(Fy ? x = y))

(4) The king of France is bald. I think that (4) can be expressed as (3) in first-order logic. Is it possible that (4) is expressed in second-order lo...

Let's say 'The F is G' instead. (3) (?x)(Fx & (?y)(Fy ? x = y) & Gx) I think that (3) completely express 'The F is G' in first-order logic. The questi...

There is a theory of truth called 'correspondence theory of truth'. It says that x is true if and only if x corresponds to the fact. However, many phi...

Thanks!

All powerful uppercuts are uppercuts.

Thanks for the answer.

All good arguments are arguments.

'Science and Metaphysics' is a good starting point to examine Sellars' philosophy of perception. It would be helpful to understand 'Empiricism and the...

Thanks!