Banno

Yep. So we must drop the idea that a sentence can be true in virtue of the meaning of it's terms alone.

Which is to say, true by use, and to drop the notion of something being true by meaning.

Just so. We bring things in to doubt when we have reason to do so. And in doing so we hold other things as indubitable. So even , venturing tentativel...

You seem to think you made a point. You didn't.

Yes, it was an extraordinary piece of work.

Why? I'm "questioning" the floor of this room...

So you have a good feeling about this. That makes no difference to us. Why should we care?

Why? On the contrary, it would appear that some things must be held indubitable in order for others to be doubted. Example already given.

Because you seem'd so certain in your doubt... So we agree that there are certainties, that some things are indubitable. Cool.

Yep. It's easy to find a few examples. See above.

Just pointing out that there are things that you do not doubt. Sure, ask folk to show why they take something to be true. While you are at it, ask fol...

Are you happy to doubt that you are reading this? Your replying would surely show your doubt to be misplaced. At the least, while you might be able to...

What?

What?

This has the same methodological problem as your other thread. Perhaps you might get back in touch with heaven and have them reveal it to everyone? He...

But not to us. Why should we take your word for it?

This is one of the more important criticisms of the ideas of the Tractatus, made early on in the Investigations - up to about §60, but see especially ...

Go back again; in the OP posits that a linear progression of causation is the same as a closed loop of causation. That is wrong. He then equate pi wit...

What could that mean? Pseudo-scientific garbage? New age postulating? Certainly that's not philosophy, in anything more than a "pop" sense; though it ...

"Pi is infinity" is not a mathematical proposition? Or will you claim anything in order to defend your account?

Nice, Tones. I'll go along with that. Thanks.

Something form Hanna Arendt:

I have responded, and here do so again. If you post, I reserve the privilege of responding; and the option of not. As, presumably, do you.

Yeah. My tongue is a bit sharp today. The truth is, folk do seek what they want, as says, and good on 'em for doing so. Who hasn't mistaken what they ...

I put my success down to the quality of my company.

Arguably the first two sought enlightenment or an eternal reward in heaven. Kepler and Galileo present more difficult cases.

Well, for those reading on - there may be some - since you do not accept the need for truth, argument is irrelevant. And it seems you cannot recognise...

Ah, young @"Jamal" has been looking for examples of the motte-and-bailey fallacy. So you would retreat from the Bailey of replacing truth with advanta...

So you doubled down, accusing me of mere rhetoric. Well, good for you. At least there is some consistency in your inconsistency. Because that is what ...

5. Four Models of Linguistic Reference. Interesting that these do not appear mutually exclusive... There's no obvious reason that all three could not ...

My friend Bruce ordered burgers for us yesterday, giving his name. It was misheard as "Chris", but despite that we managed to get the order. The name ...

Dyslexia lures.

I get that.Yep. But there remains a problem with that description. Theosophy and such new age stuff and religion more widely sought to find the truth,...

, notice that "Batchelor" is not a proper name. The word works, despite there never having been a baptism. So on two accounts, the causal chain theory...

Cheers. I'll take your word for the exegesis, and move on, since Aristotle's notions of causation are somewhat anachronistic. That is, our understandi...

Well, we can go in to why religion fails to provide moral authority, if that suits. It's basically because dogma is algorithmic, while making choices ...

The tools of philosophy are the words they use, so it is best we use them with due diligence. The account in the OP is as follows: And the clear answe...

I concur, and said as much earlier. The trouble is, while religion pretends to moral authority, it repeatedly fails. So there can be no argument that ...

You would deny Invicta the privilege of meaning what he says? Then you are harder on him than even I.

I don't see anything like the argument suggested in the OP, in the SEP article.

No it isn't.

Someone's gotta fill in the gaps.

The OP looks like an abortive attempt to defend the doctrine of original sin. The blatant fallacy inherent in the phrasing of this question is black-o...

Then it's hard to see what an I-language could be. seems to have avoided this conclusion by enlarging the notion of innate concepts to include everyth...

So is this true, or is it just to your advantage? Has this been widely discussed, or are you merely making a rhetorical ploy? If you think it true, th...

Looks to be Hoffman, again. Fitness beats truth, substituting advantage for fittness. First off, even if it is true(!) that "humans are primarily driv...

And the curious thing about convention is that it requires communality of intent. That's how it differs from mere habit. Which is anathema to supposed...

If we take the answer to the above as "yes", we seem to be left with making a fairly arbitrary distinction. Sure, all unmarried men are all of them me...

So we have that all unmarried men are men. We can put this in a simple deduction. But we don't get to all bachelors are men without relying on convent...

You can eat your cake and keep it? Some statements are analytic, but only by convention? Wouldn't we thereby lose any advantage to their being analyti...