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

Banno

Comments

Not a metaphor. @"schopenhauer1" apparently expects Wittgenstein to comply to the very form his approach undermines. He claims Wittgenstein doesn't ad...
September 21, 2023 at 22:55
Wittgenstein didn’t provide a recipient for fruitcake, either. Presumable some think this a problem with his philosophy.
September 21, 2023 at 00:07
Cheers. The literature on this topic is vast.
September 20, 2023 at 22:56
I think that is a very good idea. Wittgenstein is not for you.
September 20, 2023 at 08:43
The Lord works in Mysterious Ways.
September 20, 2023 at 07:34
What's fun here is how few folk on a philosophy forum understand what a fallacy is.
September 19, 2023 at 22:44
Risible.
September 18, 2023 at 23:01
Yeah, fixed. The link should be to your first post on this thread. Point being that the topic here is essence, and the other thread is about belief. M...
September 18, 2023 at 01:41
Well, he did that, in that I had more or less taken Essence as a dead end, but what we have here gives it a bit of freshness. It harks back to some of...
September 18, 2023 at 01:05
Yep. I think it worth adding that he also shows that pointing, referring, and indeed ostension of any form are already aspects of some language game. ...
September 17, 2023 at 22:24
I can't decide if this shows hands to be illusions or reinforces their corporeality...
September 17, 2023 at 22:20
Maybe. I don't see much by way of an argument in favour of essences, a reason that we need take them into account. I agree, of course, that our langua...
September 17, 2023 at 22:16
My cynical self says that, having been unable to provide a suitable account of essences in ontological terms using modal language, Fine moved essentia...
September 16, 2023 at 22:22
Thank you. So reflecting this back, Fine shows that there are necessary truths (the singleton) that are not true of the essence of Socrates, and so th...
September 16, 2023 at 02:00
Not much. The terms in each premise do not match. On a generous reading the last three might form a syllogism, but that leaves the first out. For it t...
September 16, 2023 at 01:10
Trouble is, from a claim that you know such-and-such, we cannot conclude that such-and-such is true. After all, we do sometimes say "I thought I knew....
September 16, 2023 at 00:13
By way of relaunching the discussion of the Fine article, I might offer the following rough summary. Kit Fine pretty much accepts that the modal accou...
September 15, 2023 at 23:43
He clearly didn't write anything of the sort. He wrote that one of the ways in which words can be used is to point. The Wiki article leaves much to be...
September 15, 2023 at 23:10
has an idealist bent, and so is perhaps suggesting that any language game will do. There's a pinch of truth in saying language games do not reflect th...
September 15, 2023 at 22:54
A couple of things. In PI§66 Wittgenstein, in considering the nature of games, asks us not to theorise but instead to look at how the word "game" is a...
September 15, 2023 at 22:28
So what? Well, it comes from Kripke because he is the bloke who developed a working semantics for modality. Modality is the part of logic that deals w...
September 15, 2023 at 04:44
An alternative version. Suppose that the only thing we know about Thales is that he fell into a well. On the descriptivist account, "Thales" and "The ...
September 15, 2023 at 04:03
I don't see that you have understood the argument. Your supposed reply begs the question by supposing that "Thales" sans description does not refer to...
September 15, 2023 at 03:48
Obvious question begging on your part. You claim the name cannot work without a description, so you say that the name hasn't worked; but it has. Meh.
September 15, 2023 at 03:08
~~
September 15, 2023 at 00:44
Wittgenstein's work shows the poverty of what is here being called "theorising". There's something oddly obtuse in denouncing him for not doing someth...
September 14, 2023 at 22:48
What twaddle. Wittgenstein explicitly asks his readers to look at how words are actually used. Suggesting he does not look at how "the language game h...
September 14, 2023 at 21:43
Really? If Thales did not fall down the well, that is a truth about Thales, not about his name. You'd have to fill this out somewhat. And it's not tha...
September 14, 2023 at 05:16
yet No corporate law then. That's a rather extreme form of laissez-faire! Honestly, what you are setting out here is too incomprehensible, too incoher...
September 14, 2023 at 04:02
Worker cooperatives need not be imposed. Your' engaging in the fallacy of composition. You've also moved from the claimt hat there isno society to a c...
September 14, 2023 at 03:03
Isn't what? your point remains obscure. So if you inherit your shares, having them forced on you involuntarily, then... what? Again, you appear to arg...
September 14, 2023 at 02:44
Well, if you want to continue discussing Searle, I suggest starting a new thread.
September 14, 2023 at 01:49
Meh. Of course anyone can purchase shares, and even if the numbers are not public, the process is. What you call "collectivist politics" is a commonpl...
September 14, 2023 at 01:37
Yep. What's salient here is the communal nature of certain intentions. This relates to 's recent thread. I won't go into Searle here, too much of a di...
September 13, 2023 at 23:48
Searle posited something quite similar, which I had a go at expounding.
September 13, 2023 at 23:24
So you claim, yet "Common ownership" and "public control" are clear enough in the associations listed on the ASX.
September 13, 2023 at 23:09
Then it's hard to see what the complaint in your OP is.
September 13, 2023 at 22:45
So we agree that people can get together and form social organisations?
September 13, 2023 at 22:39
Extraordinary, that there are folk who believe in incorporation but not in society.
September 13, 2023 at 22:30
No. Forget about "the meaning of a particular word" and instead look to how it is used. There is a way of understanding a word that is not found in se...
September 13, 2023 at 22:14
Indeed, you are. One can't explain aspect perception to someone who only sees the duck.
September 13, 2023 at 22:11
Austin, especially in Other Minds, addresses "real". Consider the question: Is it a real one? When you ask if it is real, what are you sugesting? No, ...
September 13, 2023 at 22:03
Hey, folks, DNA evolved on Earth. What would be extraordinary is if ET had any DNA. The story is a crock. If you can't see that your critical skills a...
September 13, 2023 at 21:48
To be clear, what I'm suggesting is that the issue at hand – the identity of indiscernibles – is not an empirical question. Rather we might see it as ...
September 13, 2023 at 07:43
sure. Just to reiterate, I have not come across a version of essence that is of much use, but I’m happy to gives consideration to any that’s proffered...
September 13, 2023 at 03:39
I think all three assumptions problematic. For the sake of simplicity, I've been focusing on the third, using Donnellan's argument. I thought that cle...
September 13, 2023 at 02:56
Well, we might have to leave this as moot, since what you see as advantageous is what I see as deleterious. But to the topic of this thread, what sort...
September 13, 2023 at 02:39
If your point is that Russell's descriptive account is problematic, then we agree. The converse of the issue you describe is presumably that folk such...
September 13, 2023 at 02:26
Analytic thinking is not monolithic. The detail here is considerable, and the gloss you give above is far from accurate.
September 13, 2023 at 02:16
I'm pleased you are enjoying Anscombe. She is a favourite of mine. She is writing at a time and with a background that pretty much took the descriptiv...
September 13, 2023 at 02:11