Banno

Hang on - numbers need to be the same for any mind, but the concept does not require multiple minds? You know where I'm headed: the concept is the app...

Not at all - it is "how does one do philosophy well?" It's about working out what philosophy can do, and what it can't.

SO the concept two involves multiple minds? Does it also involve multiple things?

..and that involves two minds.

"the mind"? Singular? That strikes me as odd.

...because the question is senseless.

An accurate correction, it seems. So should I have said:

Perhaps; I don't think the rigid designator quite makes the point, but it might help.

That's it! But it's not as if a philosopher has a choice, any more than a cancer patient. Proper medication and good personal practices will help, but...

Can you make sense of this? "In some possible world, Bert is not Bert"? It might mean: Bert, in the actual world, might in some possible world, not be...

That's right. And in parallel, you asked nothing when you asked

Apparently not, since I did my best in pointing out that if you were not you, you could still be asking why you are who you are.

What, in your post, is puzzling? All looks pretty straight forward to me.

What more would you expect, than that folk want their wants, need their needs?

Yes, indeed, it is not saying anything, but perhaps showing something. The feeling of bewilderment in the OP derives from a poorly phrased question. T...

:smile: ...can be read as a definition of identical. Not entirely useless. "I am who I am" might offer a certain reinforcement to one's identity. and ...

If you were not you, you would still be asking why you are who you are... No, it isn't. It's a classic silly philosophical question. No, it is a gramm...

You lost me.

Well, that's not quite right. Once, to become a school teacher, but that remission was broken after a few years; and again during the second great war...

Wittgenstein would tell his philosophy students to go do something useful. What's that? This... ??

What is the case, is the case regardless of which language is used to express it. We make sense of what others say by maximising our agreement. The wo...

Why would you think that? What rules is what you do instead of philosophising. Here's the link... I may not have quoted it verbatim.

Then the experiment breaks that definition, at least in that we do not know which event is cause, and which is effect.

No, we don't.

Interesting. What follows from the experiment is that there is no reason to suppose that the big bang, a quantum event, has some particular place in a...

Nuh, again. It's your expectation that physics ought be able to distinguish the temporal order of events that is inadequate. Again, you have it backwa...

And so it is not always possible to know the cause. If the principle of causation is that every event has a cause, then the experiment is perhaps not ...

Best look to the experts to clarify our thinking: Note that last sentence; there is no cure.

@"unenlightened" makes far more sense than I do.

I just had a week off. Does that count?

https://scontent-syd2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/43528123_1843034312480445_9188870646170386432_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&oh=ea8527ca96dcb2e252368cf1c6175a75&oe=5...

Here's a fine example from the Followers of the Son showing how a rejection of suffering leads to irrationality. Since the Great Goat eats itself, suf...

There is a pattern to the grammar of some religious thought that runs parallel to Goatism. So for example one of the aspects of Capra's original paper...

Indeed; everything is a goat.

Indeed.

Well said, my brother from an udder mother.

There are more suitable epithets. The Bearded One; The Great Masticator; Swallower of All.

See this, for example: This is Dreadful. Everything is consumed by some goat; It is this immanent consumption that is the source of the manifestation ...

Evidence? Doubt makes no sense here. This is not a question that is liable to the vagaries of justification. That is, your doubt tells us nothing abou...

Anyway, on with your tale...

That some particular sheep has not yet been eaten by a goat. But it does not follow that it will not be eaten by a goat at some later stage. Indeed, m...

Perhaps we might agree to give the issue due consideration?

A good rule of thumb is that what is shown to be true by a moment of consideration will be shown to be false with due consideration.

Here is the cosmological argument as presented by Billy Capra: The absurdity of this argument is obvious.

The Great Goat is beyond fair and unfair, rational and irrational. We eaters will each in our turn be eaten.

I am happy to acknowledge my debt to Billy.

Hear, hear.

This entirely misses the point that goats eat everything. Without acknowledging this basic, self-evident truth, this hinge proposition, your argument ...

A sceptic?