Banno

The obvious thing to do is to take on board Popper's grand conjecture; take something as true - anything - and then see if you can disprove it. The tr...

Was that directed to me? It seems so. While you might not be a fan of Feyerabend, you seem to be an - unwilling - fellow traveler. Feyerabend presents...

The idea seems to be that we start with every possible belief. A, ~A, B, ~B, C, ~C... Then, So we now want to assert A over ~A; it seems we take some ...

Yeah, it is the same topic. Bolding, underlining and italics don't change that.

Why do you choose the blastocyst for your "paternal care", over the mother?

So who does the deciding? You? Your invisible friends? Take care lest someone point out that you are reneging on your moral responsibility.

Feyerabend: Anything goes.

I'd rather read Terry Pratchett.

...that's nothing to do with artefacts...

There's nothing in a statement's being true or false that renders it it eternal. Philosophical confusion often consists in mixing stuff that shouldn't...

I can; I did. Ergo, you are wrong.

Ah, the long-requested example. I'll leave this for Srap; he might be able to show the issue in a way that you can see.

This thread went nowhere.

Which pleases me immensely... https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2a/c9/e2/2ac9e258f9274aadc166f37f9429673f.jpg

Yep. Use the US funds to set up a decent healthcare system. These folk are nasty remnants from the middle ages.

But it doesn't do this, either; as pointed out. Bayesian analysis works better.

As if more evidence were needed that Catholicism is evil.

Sweet. On that we might agree. Where we might differ is that I remain unconvinced that there is a puzzle.

Nailing jelly to a wall.

Special pleading; ad hoc fallacy.

Indeed.

And...? It's the conclusion that counts here. What do you conclude?

I'm at a loss to see what your view is. You appeared to set up a thread in defence of falsificationism. You then accepted that falsificationism does n...

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/74/PicassoGuernica.jpg Painted using a matte house paint with the least possible gloss, on stretched canva...

Well, no, it doesn't. Not on the basis of "pure, abstract logic" alone. There's no algorithm for deciding what to believe. If you agree with that, in ...

...

Hm. Stop reacting and have a think for a bit.

If Pf doesn't get Quine, Hemple won't help.

Yeah, OK... So falsificationism doesn't work, and that's NO DUH for you. We have agreement. So why bother with this thread?

And...? Again, if you assume a distinction between objective and subjective statements, you shouldn't be surprised to find that you can't bridge the g...

Take out the loaded term "objective" and what do you have? Red is used in explanations. I handed you that cup because it is red. Introduce the problem...

...only there's more going on here than "pure, abstract logic". The new belief that ~B itself requires justification - that is, underdetermination sug...

Hmm. See the Dennett quote at ... It's not "illusionism"; thinking a tornado is an illusion would be... counterproductive. Red isn't part of our scien...

It's six o'clock. It is true that it is six o'clock. Now, it's one past six. It is no longer true that it is six o'clock. Sometimes truth changes.

How? So far as I can see, you have not shown how. Can you perhaps give an example? "...and you can show that B and C are contrary to each other"; the ...

Neither have philosophers...

Yep. @"Pfhorrest" seems to have missed the force of Quine's critique. A "reason why you can't" will still be underdetermined...

But that language works... suppression, expectation and prediction have Bayesian uses. The danger is a philosopher thinking this explains something ab...

So... OxOxOxOxO is an artefact, and hence not a real pattern. What?

Almost the same as the Chinese room. Let's not. :grin:

The coin is real, it's not forged. The painting is real, it's not a print The river is real, it's not a mirage. The pattern is real, it's not a...?

Thanks. I could be pedantic and ask if the brain is calculating Bayesian stats as opposed to doing something that can be described in Bayesian terms.....

See Martha Nussbaum on Capabilities and Human Rights: The Basic Capabilities for a view I think well worth considering.

Good to see some thinking going on. A woman is a person. A blastocyst is mere tissue. Somewhere between these two... Do you think there has to be a pa...

I had a blastocyst in mind; which is a cyst. So at best you would have to insist that a cyst is also a person. That's an awfully long stretch. Now the...

So this: ...was misleading in that you don't actually think knowledge is best defined in terms of critical rationalism.

So it's use consists almost solely in your being able to answer a quiz question. That does not show that knowhow and knowing are incommensurable.

Ah. Hence your inadequate response to @"Isaac".

Do we? Then why the need for a hyphen? Look at the example I already gave. Knowing that the paper shop is at the end of the street does not consist ex...

The point being, you have not here addressed Quine's point, but merely said you disagreed with it.