Banno

The poverty of Kant is the supposition that there is stuff we have to have before we can do the things. We make the stuff by doing the things. Drop me...

Again, I can see how you dug that hole for yourself. If everything begins with what is between your ears, and what is between your ears is ineffable, ...

OK, he thinks "the ground of it, the beginnings, the source, the construction of it" are between his ears. But has he an argument for this? Or is it j...

In so far as that stuff between your ears is private and ineffable, there is indeed no point in continuing the discussion.

Yet that is what @"Mww" apparently wants to do, since he thinks that both are "between your ears": Yes, insane.

Which is not true: that "(i)t's clear that the arguments in the article are successful in removing from reasonable discourse qualia that are both inef...

As @"Isaac" pointed out, there's no point in continuing a discussion in which the primary counter-argument is "...but it's obvious". No, it is not obv...

Well said. I'm hoping that my present chat with @"Mww" might proceed in a new direction. "Here is one hand"; we can perhaps agree and move on. But app...

I don't see progress. If we follow your argument, all we would have is "private, ineffable attributes". I can see how you dug that little hole for you...

I'm not keen on argument by name-calling. In terms of modality, I tend to Kripke; yet I still don't see a point to your addition.

...it seems to me that yours is a path to an unneeded and misleading superstructure... OK; a divergence from common practice. Such things are worthy o...

...unless what they are is what they do.

hmm. You’ve introduced the bugaboo “subjective” already. You and I agree Trump is venial. Don’t we have the same belief? So what is it that is subject...

I’d count that as obvious and wonder why we would bother.

Maybe. Statements are combinations of nouns and verbs and such like; Some statements are either true or false, and we can call these propositions. So,...

...all we need is a topic.

It isn't. Of course cats have beliefs. It's just that they cannot be propositional attitudes in cats, although we can set them out as propositional at...

Indeed.

Yep. So, what does that all imply?

...a little bit of defibrillation goes a long way...

They can't. But they can have an attitude towards their food.

I get the impression that there is a good conversation for us to have, if we could only find the right topic.

Should we do this, again? The notion of a proposition without language is nonsense.

Yes; one cannot coherently insist that there is a language that we cannot understand, because recognising it as a language involves recognising that i...

Where?

I'm thinking a Nagel article might be good for the next thread. One that has nothing to do with Bats. I think mentioned before that his discussion of ...

I seem to recall a debate in which I used your ideas for floor polish. Was that here, or in The Other Place?

...yeah, that bit.

I'm just not at all clear as to what you position is... ...beyond name-calling.

I agree - I think. I have in mind the difference between talking about a calculator adding up a series of numbers and talking of a calculator flicking...

Nuh. That'd take all the fun out of it.

Sure, all that. But a belief is still an attitude towards a proposition. You appear sometimes to lose track of that.

I very much appreciated how you actually addressed the text of Dennett's article. Closer to what I had in mind when I started this. The purpose of thr...

@"fdrake" joined the chorus for a while. Seems he had the sense to move on, too. As did @"Kenosha Kid"

@"Wayfarer" dropped in to mention Nagel. Nobody seemed to much care.

@"Isaac" seems to have given up. His contribution was pivotal, giving a solid foundation to the physiological background. Or to put it another way, mo...

@"frank" tripped up on irrelevancies. Devonian, Pleistocene, Mozart and Lorn. A couple of neat jokes, though.

I didn't understand much of what @"Mww" had to say.

"...seemed..."

@"Marchesk" seemed to me to simply vacillate. Perhaps I wasn't following closely enough. Perhaps not.

@"Olivier5" seemed to have some interesting points but was unable to articulate them, finishing by simply ignoring the arguments while slashing out at...

@"creativesoul" has done a fine job in carrying the good fight, apart from that strange stuff about pretheoretical beliefs.

Well, in the end it seems to me that intuition pumps will not work on folk with the wrong intuition. It's clear that the arguments in the article are ...

I like my coffee bitter and sweet. Hence, my preference is neither ineffable, nor private. If qualia are ineffable and private, they have nothing to d...

I am pleased that this thread is now longer than that on the US election. Thanks for asking.

That's hilarious! Funniest thing today.

Innate purposes? Purposes are given. SO one might better ask "Can we say for sure that anything exists that could not be given some purpose?" An impor...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH8hcfhG1Jo

Why should it have a purpose? Teleological thinking. Again, the misapplication of a notion leads to lots of philosophical noise.