Banno

Well, that one's easy. Bob prefers Vanilla - that's a question of taste, and might lead to Bob only eating Vanilla ice cream. "Bob prefers Vanilla" an...

Folk seem curiously protective of their affectations. https://www.seriousscrum.com/images/storage/prismic/X19ZPhEAACIAd3slf140c581-c77f-4d51-8b41-ad50...

https://medicalphotography.com.au/Article_01/Fig61.jpg The image on the right was taken using film sensitive to reflected (not fluorescent) UV. The ot...

I've lost you somewhere. It's nothing to do with ill-defined definitions. It was about attempting to get a clear notion of what your word "subjective"...

You've rejected P5 at P2. The two are inconsistent. You've defined states of affairs as having a word-to-world direction of fit, and hence as not incl...

yet There's nothing here that helps us see a difference. One might as well claim: and Is this supposedly the justification...? The Dicksonia example s...

Ah. You are new. Have a look at Austin: Sense and Sensibilia and When Does Philosophy Become Affectation? Cheers.

One has to come to terms with how different, and how similar, moral statements are from physical statements. Analytic considerations, as I hope is cle...

How are we to tell which is which, in new cases? For example, the tree fern in the front yard... customary or symbolic? Note that it's a Dicksonia ant...

Not at all. There are now in your world, some things you can doubt and some things that it is silly to doubt. I'll count that as progress. So now the ...

Ok, so your argument is that facts about an objects constitution are objective, but facts about an object's identity are subjective? And further we "d...

You are under no obligation to participate. Good. So, contrary to what you said before, there are things that it makes no sense to doubt.

Good idea. Now you are getting it. In what way can you doubt that you are reading this question? Notice that your reply puts the lie to that doubt.

Oh, my bad. That should have read "physical", not "moral". I know. But I'm attempting to have you do so, so as to show that the distinction cannot be ...

Have you ever wondered why it is so intractable? Some great philosophy was done in the middle of last century, when Austin and Wittgenstein and others...

I don't want moral statements to "escape from being subjective", any more than I want them to escape from being green. I'm saying that the framing of ...

Ok. Have you been following the discussion here about direction of fit? If not, have a read of . To "discover" something, it has to already be there t...

So what is there that is the opposite of "subjective", if we take this as a definition? What could be objective? Because there is nothing we could lis...

Just to be sure, the concern here is not "table", the type, but "That table", with the definite pronoun. It's an individual table. What I want to show...

the conclusion was pretty obvious from the OP. It’s a silly question.

That presumes a word-to-world direction of fit.

Yes, god explains everything: God did it. Hence god explains nothing. This is where I disagree with Abraham. I don't see that "god wills it" is the sa...

In addition, it remains open as to whether we ought follow god's will. Why ought we do as god says? One cannot avoid having to make choices.

Why is London analogous to table, but wood isn't? London is also what it is - and that can also be boiled down to atoms, quarks etc... And the high-le...

Often the conversation degenerates into arguments about the "true" nature of this or that "ism". Better to keep to the basics. So in this thread, the ...

You are saying "yes", it is subjective, then concluding that it is objectively true? I don't follow this at all. But isn't the table also a subjective...

Well, if here were not, why would we have three distinct terms for them? And that pretty much sums up this thread: failure to pay attention to how wor...

The question was: The first answer: London does't work. Let's try "The table is made of wood". It strikes me that the claim "The table is made of wood...

If your conclusion is that London does not exist, it seems you have gone amiss somewhere in your argument. Folk hereabouts seem to confuse "subjective...

Check out the SEP article. For the rest, yes, all good questions, which add to the puzzle of why Ayer limited his verification only to sense data. Aus...

"London" is a subjective term? Sure, the boundary of the city is a convention... but that does not make it subjective. And that's actually why I chose...

Again, your point, if there is one, is obtuse.

Good for them.

again, the difference between "ought' and "is" is direction of fit rather than the ambiguity of states of affairs.

Nor further away. There are moral truths.

Well, the claim that London is in England could not be made without a subject to make the claim. Is it subjective, too? You will have real trouble att...

Too strong. It's not that the believing makes it so. If it's true, it's true regardless of the belief.

Nice summation.

A judgement, perhaps, but why "subjective"? What does that word add?

Do we have to choose? Why not both, or either depending on what you are doing?

He wrote one as well? I'll have to look for it... :wink:

There seems to be an advantage in keeping our ought statements small. Burying children under buildings is wrong, even if it helps one meet the Grand S...

Well, why not. There's more than one way to use the word, sometimes folk use it to refer to any truth, sometimes, and especially sometimes when doing ...

Please do. Something has to be said about Carnap and Ayer, as seen by Austin. Carnap had the idea that it didn't much matter which sentences were held...

, , I'm not keen on Abraham, sacrificing others at the behest of a voice in his head. I'd rather Tolstoy's three questions.

Well, if I have any opinion it's that assigning names to positions doesn't work, and doesn't help. it's all in the detail.

I'd taken a bit of a hiatus these last few days, distracted by a couple of other threads. That and that your comment needed some digesting. I gather t...

Sure. Understood. Moral cognitivism: Ethical statements may have a truth value. They may be true, they may be false. Moral cognitivism does not rule o...

The point here is to show how an ought statement follows from an is statement. That's what Searle does. It would be no defence, on being accused of re...

You made the claim, of the central figure of Ordinary Language Philosophy, that he is not an Ordinary Language Philosopher. This is the person for who...