Banno

Sure.

As you like.

...as we see from our point of view. "...what it is like..." looks no more than an odd reification, creating an it where there is none.

Who?

There's something profoundly amiss with the "...like..." in "something it is like...". We see what it is like for Roger to eat cake.

Wouldn't that just be what it is like for Roger to eat cake?

is what it is like to experience X distinct from just doing X? So is experiencing eating cake different from eating cake?

Or, take the example of being colourblind to disability: treating a wheelchair user as if they did not require ramps...?

Hu?

Sure. THere's little of philosophical interest in this thread. Might need another.

Yeah, yeah, hold you horses.

Acknowledge and accept differences rather than denying that they exist.

Yep.

I don’t think I had read any of your posts up until this last. So, not you in particular.

Philosophically what is of interest is the classic criticism of liberalism: that in claiming neutrality on religion, race, ethnicity, gender or abilit...

but why ask me? You are accusing me of a bunch of stuff that I will not own.

There’s some odd, very defensive posts here. Methinks they protest too much?

Some very few. The others carry them.

See? And they thought we could not reach any mutual agreement.

Never really understood why you guys call a pub, a bar. One of those ineffable cultural things, no doubt.

It doesn't so much solve the tragedy as replace it, by making the commons the property of the dictator, who through their good will deems that we migh...

Well said. It's liberalism claiming that your black skin, your gender, your ability, does not count for anything; I see you as an individual - that is...

No one is allowed beg in our street, regardless of how wealthy they are, and what bribes they can pay. Turkey declaring a ceasefire after it has annex...

Looks like I walked in on a pub fight.

Mmm. But isn't this your first post in reply to me?

A dictatorial enforcement in order to avoid the tragedy of the commons. Nuh.

An oddly self-negating construct: "all we need is the rules we already have, but they don't work".

...and are, as you say, butchered. Socrates knows that he knows nothing; further, as demonstrated by his method, nor does anyone else, since they cann...

I've no idea what you are asking.

And yet some things must be taken as given in order for the discussion to even begin.

A family resemblance, then. Given any definition of religion, there is some item that counts as religious and yet does not fit that definition...

Sure; but it doesn't stop the discussion. Take Ridding Anselm's notion of inconsistency is a work of ages...

Elephantine, indeed. A species of belief, to be sure; but not a species of truth. Mapping out the differences and similarities between faith and certa...

With this I can agree. However I do not agree that it follows that we ought start with agreement as to our various definitions. Much off philosophy, e...

cheers

Why? It's the privileged who can afford to ignore minority status. The European who cannot see colour, the male who cannot see the need for feminism, ...

Racial colour-blindness (sic.) is a conceit for the privileged.

The way things are going we won't make a god; indeed, we will be lucky to make it to next Tuesday.

Meh. All sorts of issues with this flight of fancy. You might suggest that we adopt "make a god" as our purpose. But to suppose that we unknowingly ha...

"Is it raining?" contains no wh... word. Questions without wh... words are not uncommon. Don't you agree? Might it have been otherwise? Do you think p...

Two types of questions: requests for information and teaching questions. A question has a form such that the required information is set out, usually ...

Interesting. Divergence is good.

Why should we carry out punishment?

Or even, as in the case of potential energy, as a manifestation of good bookkeeping. Sure.

SO you are not here for an open critique of your ideas, preferring to set out the conditions for any disagreement only in your own terms. Fine.

:grin: So now you want to talk about me? Sure. But first, take your foot out of your mouth.

This is a lie worthy of Trump. You provided the link to the Google search. Look at the Google Search. It does not support your contention that Newton ...

Consider the post It's pretty astonishing that someone with pretences to philosophical reasoning can present such an argument.

Who is more foolish - the fool, or we who engage the fool in conversation, expecting reason?

It becomes harder to assume sincerity when @"3017amen" continues to ask questions that have been answered multiple times by various folk, and in much ...