Banno

Part of the impact of his development of formal modal logic was the implications for consideration of essence, especially and interestingly the necess...

The idea that Aristotle trumps Kripke in talk of essence is risible.

I suspected we'd eventually get to qualia. What I've been saying here is pretty much what I've argued elsewhere, in detail, against qualia being ineff...

Hmm. I've commented elsewhere on arguments that assume ontology and epistemology are incommensurate. I don't find that line of reasoning at all convin...

That strikes me as a false dilemma. But is that what you are saying? It remains that one does not know what one will do next. Even if what one will do...

Then your mind seems oddly passive. I'm glad I'm not you, just watching your thoughts pop up, unable to decide between them. Is it pleasing to have su...

@"litewave", It's far from clear what you response to the OP is.

Deference would be more apt than difference... :wink: The trouble with free will, of course, is that it's never been clear what it is. I'm dubious tha...

Yes. Problem solved.

Are you not amused?! The topic was always going to attract the day trippers. This approach must underpin any discussion here. Folk suppose that since ...

Perhaps, there's your problem. There have been a few developments since then.

Yep. As if our inability to "say objects" were an incapacity. Because Nothing is not said here... but something is not done: the riding of the bike. T...

And yet we choose! Consider the two wolves within, Stoicism, and Cognitive Behaviour Therapy... Hence Paul's argument is flawed. Mind is recursive, no...

Yep. A dead frog is not a frog? That is, not sure about your notion of essence. Nowadays a property is considered essential if and only if it belongs ...

That right there is some mad shit. That ends this chat.

"Some metaphysics is integral to physics. This is metaphysics. Therefore this is integral to physics". I don't think so. Type/token.

I can't see how that might work. What is there that cannot be said? "...it hardly conveys the full experience" - of course not! That has to be experie...

That does not follow. Nor this.

All of the above by way of avoiding the "woo". But what about the stuff we can do before we reach for the Tao Te Ching? We have three related words. T...

I'm impressed with this. It looks like a formalisation (or at least a more formal variation) of the private language argument, in that the "physical r...

Indeed, I've much sympathy with that. The further question might be what it is that they ought be quite about, and that, if anything, is the topic of ...

And that as we have hashed out previously, is a path to solipsism. Happily, if is right then your internal state is irrelevant.

I think we can take a slightly odd turn here, related to @"Sime"'s post. Consider the following puerly gramatical points. "I can ride a bike" will be ...

Interesting. So continuity models how the beetle drops out of the discussion... :grin: That's actually pretty cool. But the conclusion with regard to ...

, , ah, we remember Paul, from back in the days before the exodus and the time of wandering, before Jamal made for us this sacred place! But the young...

The taste of coffee is given as ineffable; that is, that one cannot explain that taste to someone who hasn't tasted it. But contra that, we do talk ab...

What?

Motion is not always progress. :wink:

:grin: The only problem with that is how you said it. Yep, you choose within the world. I don't think so.

Indeed, philosophy of science has to be post hoc; done by watching what it is that scientists do.

The argument you've adopted is that physics in the eighteenth century did not rely on conservation laws therefore they are not essential to physics. B...

Seems to me you have given your argument a self-inflicted injury. To maintain your definition of metaphysic you have to claim that a central, constitu...

So we count the conservation laws not as physics but as metaphysics? Think on that for a bit. These are the core, fundamental rules of physics, and ye...

Are conservation laws part of physics or part of metaphysics? The first law of thermodynamics, colloquially, says that energy can neither be created n...

Definitions are not as useful as is often supposed in settling disagreements. Philosophy is not just providing definitions. See Confirmable and influe...

There's a sympathetic account of Bergson's wider philosophy on Philosophy Now from 2004. Might be paywalled. It has the smell of Tory romanticism abou...

Mentioning QM in a philosophical discussion not specifically about QM is the philosophical version of Godwin's Law, with the corollary that once QM is...

More than the best you can do? You're not happy with what you are doing. So do something different. Me, I'm going out to trim one of the shrubs in the...

By way of summary of what I have said: Some of what is called metaphysics is just nonsense. Some of what is called metaphysics is integral to physics....

I made it explicit that I was referring to Popper, and hence to falsificationism. The comment had nothing to do with mind/body; why you would go off o...

There was a bit more to it than just that. "Rebel" is far too strong; much of the later Witti is about what it is to follow or go against a rule, and ...

You cannot be certain of the consequences of your actions. But you have to act anyway. Hence there is a limit to what is reasonable. My Master's thesi...

Yep. The sane response to "what if"'s was articulated by Terry Pratchet, but I don't recall which book it was (Equal Rights?). Esme Weatherwax meets w...

So the project uses computers to pars arguments from ontology formally. Like Russel's theory of descriptions, Wittgenstein in the Tractatus, Davidson'...

Perhaps I don't quite grasp what it is you are suggesting, but it seems not to be a counterpoint so much as an ill-formed agreement.

@"jgill" Interesting. I noted the mention of a "computational metaphysics"... apparently an attempt at a "formal ontology". On the face of it, after G...

Two previous threeads for you: Confirmable and influential Metaphysics goes into some detail concerning defining metaphysics in terms of the logical s...

Well, the obvious point is that not all metaphysics is legitimate. A large part of what folk call metaphysics is just poor thinking. So we might more ...

From the article cited in the OP as "the main source material discussed" @"Bartricks"'s having a lend of you all. Stop feeding him.

By growing flowers from seed, mostly. I hope most of the replies here have left you less than satisfied. There's a blindness in the responses of scien...