Banno

It would be a shame to mistake such grammatical observations for metaphysics or epistemics.

It's more what I intend to do than what I actually do. My thumb tends to get left behind as my fingers retreat, with results not unlike your recent ad...

Perhaps. I'd at least add the present craze for giving inadequate, even inept, answers to philosophical questions using bad physics. But we might look...

...for example? It seems to me that we agree on more than we disagree on... if you see what I mean. So the approach here: ...we agree is a bit of a mu...

The world as a mental disfunction. Grasping at straws. Comforting just-so stories. But not clear, critical philosophy. Stop here, look at what you are...

One hopes that's coming back to bite them on the bum. But, yes. Any and all attitudes are open to manipulation.

If you don't have a good grasp of infinity, nor of nothing, then look 'em up on the interwebs. You can learn all sorts of cool stuff there. But don't ...

Then presumably there is an idea that negates "every idea contains the seeds of its own negation"...?

This is shite. Like saying you can't teach a fish to ride a bicycle, hence fish are nonsense.

Not sure what your point is here. My purpose was to point out that "progress" is an attitude rather than a fact, that Pinker's error is to treat it as...

Yep. But I'm far from convinced that you can. Nothing and infinite are both quite "intelligible". Your comparison with supernatural fails. The map-ter...

Rubbish.

Basic life skills... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv7td6UxBXQ...that allow you to keep your finger tips.

No, obvious. What advocates of "supernature' want is to say that some events are acts of volition by unusual beings - gods, ghosts or ghouls. But show...

Again, isn't claiming something as supernatural, by that very fact, claiming it to be unintelligible? We might proceed by always asking, how could we ...

The OP is a quagmire. The antinomies are ill-formed. In part they relate to physics, in part to logic and the structures of the language in which they...

If so that'd be because it leans against the now familiar error of mistaking the "what is' for the "what we want". No list of the changes made by tech...

Pinker is a bit of a prat. But having said that, one of the exercises I used to do with kids (adolescents) was to have them respond to his TED talk. W...

Can't see how that works. Seems to me that if something happens that is contrary to some posited law of nature, then the law is wrong. So the choice t...

is back.

Isn't what counts here, what you do with that belief? Advocates of Quantum Mechanics don't generally have much to say about how one shoudl live from d...

So your claim is, roughly, that folk of a religious inclination, when faced with arguments or evidence against their beliefs, will instead of reconsid...

What you have to say is too muddled to have any reverberation.

Same for the direction this thread has taken, I say. The quoted conclusion is useful. It is worth pointing out that none of the supposed solutions is ...

The US followed an insidious path to a now intractable problem. Given the streak of rabid individualism that runs through that culture, the refusal by...

No, we put 'em out back. 'stralia is big. You folk think Texas is big. It isn't. Some of our states are as small as Texas.

:rofl:

there’s the possibility of Australia invading Taiwan. Then we might stand a chance of developing some sort of production capacity…

I dunno. I guess I give up, having not been able to follow what it is you might be claiming. In Newtonian physics gravity just is an acceleration of a...

I can see why he is your new-found friend. The main critique may well be Chalmers' - that whatever Kastrup is talking about, it's not "consciousness" ...

Why would you suppose that? An odd response. What the Universal Law of Gravitation says is that the force between two masses is inversely proportional...

the universal law just says two masses will accelerate towards each other. So your explanation would amount to that two masses accelerate towards each...

This is all arse-about. In newtonian physics, Gravity is just a name for the acceleration of any two masses towards each other. Nothing more. Saying g...

I think the bland style is a part of Charmers' joke.

A polite way of saying Kastrup is mad. Here's what happens: folk grab on to idealism (or realism) and then look for ways to make it appear coherent. T...

, , this one: Idealism and the Mind-Body Problem 's schema does not quite capture the full depth and breadth of idealist thinking... The salient point...

Ain't it the truth.

Yeah, I'm familiar with all that. Have you seen the article by Chalmers in which he lists, one after the other, for several pages, the variations on i...

Well, you've got some gall. :grin:

Sure. The question remains, what is external doing in the phrase "external reality"? Also not following how you got "idealism as simply being a substa...

Oh, you are just after an etymology. It's just "in", from PIE "en", I think. Seems the "turn" is just comparative. Hence my puzzling as to what is "in...

Again, if you had said " the notion of external and internal derives from the idea of things being internal or external to the mind", it might have so...

Ok. That does not look right, but I'll leave you to it.

I can't see that the analogue works. "Internal", in so far as it makes any sense, is in the mind, not in the body.

So idealism holds that everything is inside one's body, while realism holds that everything is outside one's body. How odd.

So your liver is internal? That just doesn't seem to be how it is being used. Perhaps, in the end all this talk of internal and external is a poor ren...

Objects in the fribble are correctly described by quantum fields. Cups aren't correctly described by quantum fields. Therefore, cups aren't objects in...

Well, that's not the common view. Where did you get this from, or is it just yours?

Roughly, realism holds that some things are as they are, without regard to their relation to us, while idealism holds that things are otherwise; that ...

Ok. I don't understand what it is "external" to, but let it pass. So it seems you now have two worlds, one described by quantum, the other by everyday...