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

Banno

Comments

I suppose your garden is in neat rows, trimmed and stately. Mine is a jungle, planted with everything that comes to hand. Some survive, some don't. I ...
July 11, 2021 at 01:30
Well, I changed my mind almost as soon as I read that. It would be naive to think that any communication here would not eventually become public.
July 11, 2021 at 01:28
But what is that truth? The moment you say what it is, you are wrong.
July 11, 2021 at 00:41
I'm not in favour of mandating a standard set of rules, but instead, keeping track of issues that might arise and providing precedent rather than legi...
July 11, 2021 at 00:25
Perhaps. But see . I'd be looking for a better analysis than personhood; and I think that is found in, say, Nussbaum and the notion of flourishing. I ...
July 11, 2021 at 00:17
Depends on my fibre intake. Generally sits around -5.
July 11, 2021 at 00:11
Oh, I think it pertinent. At issue in this thread is whether one can deduce the existence of a being from logic alone. I think that it should be in pr...
July 10, 2021 at 23:44
Narcissism.
July 10, 2021 at 23:20
That's a different question. A possible world comes about as the result of a "what if..."; then we can see if that "what if..." leads to a consistent ...
July 10, 2021 at 23:15
Demonstrably wrong, since the discussion thread is several hundred posts long.
July 10, 2021 at 23:04
...and that's the point. Possible worlds are constructed by fiat, not discovered. Hence arguments which presume to demonstrate a being that exists in ...
July 10, 2021 at 23:03
Oh, indeed. What was salient is an account of how geometry could be kept consistent when the rules are changed. It is still wrong to assert that two p...
July 10, 2021 at 22:59
Mmmm fresh meat.
July 10, 2021 at 22:48
Meh. There should be no prejudice as to writing style. Poor writing will simply be unconvincing, and quickly recognised by the audience. And there is ...
July 10, 2021 at 22:47
You mean the smell is a @"Baden"?
July 10, 2021 at 22:39
Take a look at the latest thread on abortion. The second post - by @"Bartricks", as it turns out - invokes theistic notions of soul. Here's the rub; t...
July 10, 2021 at 22:36
Well, there we have if, folks. Let that be an end to it. But perhaps not...
July 10, 2021 at 21:50
That's neat. OK, I follow that answer. The next question is, must there be an individual which exists in every possible world? It seems not, since we ...
July 10, 2021 at 21:24
Quite explicitly, I am arguing that the arguments for and against the existence of god are inconclusive. More generally, it seems to me that statement...
July 10, 2021 at 21:12
Yep. That's not a reasonable reply.
July 10, 2021 at 21:03
Possible worlds are just fiat. We make 'em up. This isn't anything magical, it;s just a way of talking about them that allows us to make sense of moda...
July 10, 2021 at 21:00
In the end your refusal to address my argument inspires pathos. No, i've pointed out that your insistence on a contradiction leads to explosion. Your ...
July 10, 2021 at 20:52
In: Euclidea  — view comment
Oh, bugger. Half the total length, of course. Simple when you see it. Solution to 1.5 Bisect the diagonal from bottom left to top right. intersection ...
July 10, 2021 at 10:12
Logicians using secret symbols to hide their dark deeds. You do understand that "possibly P" is the same as "not necessarily not P" I hope - so if I a...
July 10, 2021 at 07:33
So you are arguing that there is no contradiction involved in holding the view that non-contradiction is false. You are arguing that there is no contr...
July 10, 2021 at 06:38
In: Euclidea  — view comment
I'm stuck on 8.1 Anyone?
July 10, 2021 at 06:35
Because he knows his stuff. For example, he can read and write the Squiggles and squoggles.
July 10, 2021 at 06:34
Well, here's the odd thing; those symbols are pretty standard, and anyone who has taken the trouble to study logic will be familiar with them. But als...
July 10, 2021 at 06:33
I'm sure he would make an excellent argument for dialetheism. That's what's missing here
July 10, 2021 at 06:22
Well, no, since they are part and parcel of the logic you claim to understand, and they permit us to see the structure of the arguments more clearly. ...
July 10, 2021 at 06:18
Yes, I understand that you are claiming that the laws of logic hold in the actual world but not in other possible worlds. I've shown how that leads to...
July 10, 2021 at 06:01
Yep. Our resident expert on rationality has a problem.
July 10, 2021 at 04:17
Bartricks claims that there are contradictions in the word. Hence he claims that for some proposition A, both A and ~A are true. If A and ~A are true,...
July 10, 2021 at 04:16
Well, no, that's not how a reductio works.
July 10, 2021 at 04:09
Oh, what an opportunity that would be. Yes, I'd love to discuss dialethism with him. But as I understand it, you are asserting that the law of noncont...
July 10, 2021 at 04:08
I don't see how. Again, it's in the nature of reductio arguments to assume what is in contention and then derive a contradiction from that assumption....
July 10, 2021 at 04:03
Well, go on, do so.
July 10, 2021 at 03:42
Really? But you claim to be familiar - even expert - at logic. "A" is any proposition. "~" is "not" Brackets are...well, indications of scope... So Th...
July 10, 2021 at 03:41
Hmm. Perhaps this will help: Bartricks has contradicted himself if he makes an assertion that implies a contradiction. Bartricks asserts that the law ...
July 10, 2021 at 03:35
Ok, I bolded it, back in the thread where I showed it. No, as I said here: "I... think it a necessary truth."
July 10, 2021 at 03:24
AH, think I see. Thanks. No, I don't. That seems to imply that Donovan exists in possible world in which he does not exist.
July 10, 2021 at 03:12
No, you claimed it's circular. You did not point out a circularity. Now you engage in the rhetorical strategy of claiming to have presented an argumen...
July 10, 2021 at 03:04
Yep: I admit to hitting you back first. And I will ignore your reply to this post. Just not interested. To Which we ca now add:
July 10, 2021 at 02:36
Time, please. FInal arguments, folks
July 10, 2021 at 02:08
Exhausted by their efforts, our pairing of pugnacious pugilists have only enough energy for a single summation. Each will now present one final post. ...
July 10, 2021 at 02:06
that's the best way to think about possible worlds... as conjectures.
July 10, 2021 at 01:54
A statement is possible if it is true in some possible world; but all this means is that we could posit a world in which the statement is true. So "Do...
July 10, 2021 at 01:53
I'm having trouble with that. I can specify world in which Donovan doesn't exist, and speculate about the consequences. Someone in that world might sa...
July 10, 2021 at 01:16
Yep; that's the question, which have passed on to those with a bit more understanding of formal logic than I. See A question concerning formal modal l...
July 10, 2021 at 00:45
I did mean to come back to this, even though it will probably, on experience, meet with a mouthful of abuse rather than anything useful. No, it's a mo...
July 10, 2021 at 00:31