Banno

Oh, the joy! Light dawns! ...and of course, you were always saying this...

Sure. I think I replied to that, using Austin. A straight stick appears bent in water. It might help to try and look at why we keep coming back to the...

Just trying to work out what your claim is. So we have something like that the universe that, as it slides inevitably towards thermodynamic equilibriu...

Thanks. Reiterating, there are two bits of logic in my post, not unrelated but also not the same. The first is the classic Popperian argument that his...

As opposed to sentence? But there remains the distinction between how the universe is and how we judge it to be. On one side, we have what we state, j...

The Statement can only be made by an observer. That's quite compatible with realism -at least, those realists who do not believe in disembodied statem...

Cheers. .

More spit. Cheers.

Well, no - see my thread on logical nihilism. The "Peircean triadic systems view" is, so far as it is comprehensible, just more Hegel. It certainly is...

Back to spitting, I see. Fine. A change from your name-calling. I'll put the point more forcefully: Dialectic has more of rhetoric to it than of logic...

Well, ok, that's a way of describing it. So what. More Wittgenstein than Hegel. And the resolution is not a third option, not a synthesis, but adoptin...

To be candid, I should point out that the arguments here against idealism should not be taken as implying realism. It's not the case that one or the o...

Were this the limit of your claim, no one would be objecting. This is entirely compatible with hard realism. But you take this as somehow demonstratin...

Presumably, if you give Wigner's friend a gas mask and put her in the box with the cat, the situation for Schrödinger, outside the box, remains unchan...

So we have a universe that, as it slides inevitably towards thermodynamic equilibrium, contains pockets of ever increasing complexity. Is the argument...

Well, none I thought much good, at least. :wink: And on that we agree.

I've read a few. There is a joy in reading bad philosophy done by physicists. :smirk: In many cases it comes down to the point I just made, that physi...

A quick word about truth. There are true sentences. Some philosophers create Big theories about truth, "Correspondence", "Cohesion", "Pragmatism" and ...

I don't see how this helps, except to push you further into the ontic idealist camp.

Well, no. The cat is either alive, or it is dead: therefore there is a cat. Edit: this is not trivial; physics is based on the presumption that physic...

...and therefore he has eyes and hands! Why are eyes and hands OK, but not the sun or the earth? So the cup ceases to exist when you put it in the dis...

Or this: If you reject ontic idealism, then consciousness does not "create reality". Sure, consciousness is not a passive recipient of the stuff in th...

Bits like this: ...are incompatible with your contending that you are no ontic idealist. You are sayign that the world is, and isn't, the creation of ...

In the story I wrote for you, as we walked across the landscape we developed a way of talking about the movement of butterfly that became progressivel...

Despite the many posts, it remains unclear to me how @"Wayfarer"'s idealism holds together. He claims not to be an ontic idealist - not to be claiming...

The notion of a model is misused in various ways. One important distinction that quite often is ignored is that between neural networks and beliefs. T...

It's been a while. If there were something in it that addressed the issue, I'm sure you would be able to tell me about it.

I gotta make a lasagne.

The slobbering slave is living proof. (Too rude? I enjoy Žižek)

Yep, a model is presumably a model of something.

And I bet it's even less central to your Doing! Wittgenstein and Anscombe are lurking in the background here, pointing out that it's the use of our me...

Sure, but what he says is blatantly misguided. There is more here than mind and perception.

Didn't we at least reach some agreement that being good at physics does not make one good at philosophy? Well, no. There are cats, too. And Forums. An...

:100: :wink:

Again, something with which I have considerable sympathy. But not in terms of a dialectic, for the reasons I have given.

Actually, I gave a fairly clear argument against dialectic. Your reply amounted to waving at Pierce.

"The conscious self is a construction that arises in the dialectical process that is a world-making" is the sort of text against which Russell and Moo...

Think about it this way: if you became convinced that all of the Dialectic was in error, would that change your view of what ought be done? So what is...

Yep. Apo, Way and Moli are all attempting to answer the Big Questions with various stories. Much easier to point out the problems with their accounts,...

@"Jamal", I'm having visions of the forums being overtaken by the self-replicating grey goo of misnamed threads concerning 0.9999.... Let's hope they ...

I've used that word twice already this morning... Seems to be the word of the day. Perhaps age has given me a better understanding of its meaning.

You see, I don't think that this comment says anything. At least, not clearly. Perhaps, , I do lack faith. I'm not convinced that's a bad thing.

Hmmm. I write a post explaining how dialectic invites confabulate, and get and in reply.

Even though it is right, its authority cannot be assumed. It confabulates.

Not following you here - there is more to clarity, and to logic, than just syntax.

To which the dialetheist may simply say "so much for Aristotle".

:wink: They are neat little puzzles.

Why?

Perhaps not, but we could go for at least consistency. I'm not keen on faith... depending on how it is understood.

Ok, whereas I - and perhaps @"apokrisis" - take mind to arise within the world. Do you see how this crosses from the epistemic to the ontic, in the wa...