Banno

Well if that's all one is doing, go for it. But take care that one doesn't try to do more... see If that says "having a mechanism to make a choice is ...

Hmmm. What is it you think you are doing here?

Yeah. Not much point in this, is there.

Why "survive"?

Much of what is on this thread is incomprehensible. But there is this: I assure you that Davidson is not claiming that truth does not exist. That's no...

Stove's gem again. This post cannot refer to itself without a mind to interpret it, therefore it cannot refer to itself.

First meaning. Isn't that is it so hard to clearly define exactly the point? If language were governed by convention, if there were a set of rules tha...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8fFdc-karA

You might be right. While it is possible to think one is seeing a tree when one is not - one is mistaken, there is an hallucination or an illusion - i...

Not so fast. What more is there to having a will than making a choice? And if that's all there is to it, then how could having a will preceded making ...

IF you could chose your desire, what would you choose? Which desire do you desire? AT some point such talk becomes incoherent.

I think we need to get a bit deeper into the actual logic of the argument, but that's going to be fraught. Edited: Deleted muddle, overly formal appro...

Is that right? I rather suspect we use it, regardless, and become more adept over time. That is, learning a language and using it are the very same th...

Indeed...

Ha! You and I both have the failing of not being able to leave this shite alone. We ought take Street's advice:

:smile: On the contrary, that we don't know is at the very heart of the matter. In that regard, I take Sartre as presenting a clearer view of the situ...

As I said in a recent PM, it would be an extraordinary presumption on someone's part to see us here doing this, and suppose to themselves that that is...

Sure, you have a will. I am a lot more than just my will. I am also my desires, feelings, pains, endeavours, failings, hunger, property, friends, cat....

So instead of "we have eyes, therefore we cannot see", it would be "we have desires, therefore we cannot choose"... At first blush this looks pretty g...

I think the better presentation of the argument comes just after the piece you quoted - that we have eyes, and therefore we cannot see. And that puts ...

I can't see how that could be made coherent. Even if there are causes that determine what will happen next, it remains that we do not know what that w...

Try that on Nietzsche. Or Peter Singer.

An interesting thought. I might go back and take a look at the logic of the argument again before continuing.

I almost listed him... but went instead for his former lover, finding her more readable, more interesting and more palatable.

.. one person got the joke...!

I'm not just looking for analytics. Anyone who is socially active. He is often cited as a philosopher, so no debate from me.

Worth considering. But it looks a lot like bending "convention" until it breaks. How could a once-used convention serve as a justification? I'm sure t...

No one should. But there it is. The whole exercise is a response to a post from , to which I did not reply. Apparently not replying has its own compli...

Misanthropy seems quite natural in these times.

Come on - Who are the socially active philosophers? who are we talking about? Don't concern yourself with if they are positive or negative; we can loo...

AH, but how do you know?? :lol:

Russell, of course. The vast part of his life was spent on social issues. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/456809

Then we have folk with a background in philosophy, who work in other areas - Popper's student George Soros; so beloved by the right wingnuts. https://...

I think it one of the best aspects of philosophy since Moore and Russell. Grand systems, by their very nature, are wrong; and I mean both in terms of ...

Perhaps, as an antidote to this rather nasty little thread, we might compose a list of philosophers who are socially active. Peter Singer, of course. ...

That same argument has been aimed at other sorts of philosophy. The premiss of this thread, as I pointed out earlier, is to treat philosophy like a co...

With proper attribution, I hope...

Of course, all of this discussion took place years ago, and in the intervening time those bright young things at Google simply ignored all this and sm...

Incidentally, I'm in the "denies that we are ever in, and hence believes there is no problem about how to get out" camp. Too many folk hereabouts trea...

The most direct refutation remains Stove's Gem. Incidentally, an excellent piece of analytic philosophy, from a pair of authors who probably would not...

Consciousness has a pretty clear definition. You learn it when you do a first aid course. The issues that are causing such consternation here are bord...

A bit of self-reflection can be good for the soul. Or would be, if we had them. Have you any interest in Žižek? I've been trying to make sense of his ...

Use. What you do with that string of scribbles. Think I've said that before.

I became more polite. (Stop laughing, @"Baden"...)

I would once have used the very same words. About that Continental junk. This thread is of no value. I'm sure we could find something more productive ...

Sure, that's an interesting approach, but let's not pretend it is the whole of philosophy. The analytic approach has its own merits. The two approache...

We had Searle drop in to a previous incarnation of this forum. I asked him about the Chinese room, and he expressed regret that it had been taken up a...

...so he has understood Chinese And yet... ...so he has not understood Chinese This doesn't strike you as problematic?

Well, that's not the Wittgenstein I see. But hey, go for it.

Wittgenstein would perhaps have agreed.