Banno

Well, I'm not sure I do, either. From the OP: The difference would be exactly the truth of the obligation... Michael seems to imply that there might b...

Yep - for the longest time infanticide was considered an acceptable expediency. Now, not so much. Pederasty has a similar history. There's something s...

Yes, that gives some indication of the issues involved. I think @"Michael" skates over too much. If water is H?O, then necessarily water is H?O. There...

Debatable as to whether that counts as "injury" - to pick an example, scarring as a ritual in transitioning to adulthood. But yes, I agree. Part of th...

Hmm. Might come back to this later. Looks like word play. As if "physical or emotional injury" were not evil.

Well, no, it isn't. It's defining "harm" as doing evil. The reverse. Not seeing why this is significant.

Sorry - the OED is ethically naturalist? Can you explain that?

:wink: My bolding.

Again, "Why be moral?" is an infelicitous question - being moral is what you ought to do. Hence the answer to "ought you be moral?" is "yes!"

That's just reasserting that it's not a contradiction. Presumably a harm is immoral regardless of where it takes place - in any possible world. Again,...

I hadn't paid this much attention. Why not insist that if one ought not kill babies, then one ought not kill babies in every possible world? That such...

Given any rule, there remains the choice whether to follow it or go against it. Will you decide by looking to another rule? Then for that rule, will y...

Ok.

You don't see the relevance of counterfactuals to questions of possibility and necessity. Ok, then. I gather this doesn't help... Counterfactuals? I d...

Yep. That's one approach, there are others. Social Institutions Collective Intentionality

Well, you don't have to be on this thread. What do you want?

Now you are starting to get it.

Taking "imaginary" to mean "possible"... Simply by specifying the identity. That's how counterfactuals are usually understood: "Janus might have been ...

Look up the definition of a word in the dictionary. Then look up the definition of each of the words in that definition. Then look up the definition o...

And your marriage? Is it imaginary too? A "promissory note" – that's imaginary? Money - imaginary? Along with Amazon and The Conservative Party - thes...

Meh.

I am familiar with that case. What do you see as its relevance?

Fine. Since you offer no significant alternative, I'll repeat that it is a commissive, a choice about the use of "schopenhauer1" specifying that "any ...

Hand waving. Are you saying it is an induction, like "all swans are black"? If not, what?

Yeah. My only purpose here was to try to make the nuance clear.

Cool. That's closer to Kripke than to Lewis. I think this the best way for you to defend your account. I wasn't expecting you to take that option. I d...

Yes, that's what I'm asking you. Too far off point. If you won't play neither will I. It's not an observation; so in what way could it be considered e...

, , So have you looked into every possible universe and seen that all the schopenhauer1's have the same genome? Or is it rather that you have specifie...

I'll try again from another direction. When you say that schopenhauer1 necessarily has genome G, are you making a discovery about how things are, or a...

Yep. By way of trying, what status, what sort of sentence, do you think the one labeled K1 has? Do you think it an observation? Something that is empi...

The salient bit is a subtle argument from Kripke, summarised in the SEP. K1 is invalid. Kripke justifies its occasional use as “by a priori philosophi...

It involves lawyers. Of course it does. Cheers. Happy Christmas. Or whatever.

Those ideas are further developed in subsequent books, and especially The Creation of Social Reality, which is about our mutual construction of our so...

See the above to Creative.

Yeah, it's a bit lost, as tends to happen in the dregs of an interesting thread. I'm just drawing out a few final points.

The explanation I gave previously, pretty much ignored by those who are still here, and so I presume not understood, is to do with direction of fit. '...

Now you are thinking. There's more than the paperwork. There's the actions and intents that form it and are formed by it. We do things with words.

Pretty much. Your argument is that therefore the contract is physical? But the point is that the contract, mortgage, promises, marriages and so on are...

Let's check with the local lawyers... @"Ciceronianus", @"Tobias", If you have time, could you tell us if a contract, marriage or mortgage ceases to ex...

When the Public Records Office in Dublin burned down, the various incorporations and marriages who's documents were destroyed did not cease to be. You...

Trouble is, "a state of affairs" traps folk into thinking about how things are, nti how they ought be. One of the issues with taking a substantive vie...

Franky, that's shoehorning. A company, a marriage, a mortgage, a promise - these are not physical. Destroy the building, the company continues. Burn t...

Are you claiming that they are not things or that they are physical?

A company is a thing, and is not physical. So is a promise, and a mortgage, and a marriage.

What?

Do you think this something we discover, or is it just two ways of talking about numbers? https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/8110/1-does-not-re...

Meaning is biological and yet biology cannot explain proper names. Not a lot of use, this idea that meaning is biological.

Well, in some possible world you were born premature and disabled- presuming you are not so already. That is a "stopping point" that has nothing to do...

So where is it then? One can dissect a leaf, or a biome, which goes across and between the plants and animals involved. Where do I go to dissect or ob...

You have to choose one approach or the other. They are not the sort of thing you can mix and match to suit your mood.