You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Banno

Comments

So we agree that the second response seems inadequate*? Cool. Making a deduction is a process, something we do, rather than something sitting passivel...
May 28, 2025 at 22:04
, Leon Much as I dislike the present infection of Aristotelian thinking, I have to agree with this: Does this roughly correspond to your point, Moli?
May 27, 2025 at 23:32
There's a risk, in focusing on second reply, of watering down the response to the other two. But it;s interesting, so... I gather, or at least supose,...
May 27, 2025 at 21:52
Thank you. Excellent phrase.
May 27, 2025 at 20:59
An excellent reply. "=" is used in different ways in these examples, so one can argue that such equations as these do not use "=" in the way that it i...
May 27, 2025 at 05:02
Unless we have the difficult situation where an approved drug is blocked by legislation from being used for it's approved purpose. In January, the Que...
May 26, 2025 at 04:30
That'll save on the physics budget then. No need for all that experimental machinery if they can work it out by deduction. Pencil and paper from now o...
May 26, 2025 at 04:05
"seem true a priori"? Surely not. Your intuitions can't be that bad.
May 26, 2025 at 03:57
The law doesn't enable anything much. Except text book, perhaps. They do describe motion precisely, enabling prediction. Best avoid giving then the on...
May 26, 2025 at 03:55
There's a difference between outlawing and not approving. That's what I'm drawing your attention to.
May 26, 2025 at 03:50
...keep going....
May 26, 2025 at 03:33
Not determined so much as described. The motion precedes the "law," and supersedes it, too. The law was decided as a result of looking at the motion, ...
May 26, 2025 at 03:32
Not too keen on that. I'm involved in health consumer advocacy hereabouts, so I hope not - and doubt it, since I get to hear more than my share of hor...
May 26, 2025 at 03:27
Thanks for being candid. I have a bit of an issue with legislating such "protections". Probably a hang over from studying Popperian ad hoc social engi...
May 26, 2025 at 03:08
Neat analysis. Cool. Makes a mess of the conservative desire to force everyone into one of two fixed boxes because complexity and ambiguity make them ...
May 26, 2025 at 02:46
And ignored the reasons given for not doing so. I didn't come here for a mud wrestle, a he-said-she-said yawn fest. Your accusations of trolling are f...
May 26, 2025 at 02:23
Compounding your own confusion. The law of diminishing returns applies. Have fun.
May 26, 2025 at 02:01
I'm here. I'm making noise. While your passion is apparent, I've not been persuaded to reconsider my view. Your tone is confrontational rather than en...
May 26, 2025 at 01:58
Calling this thread "philosophy" is a stretch. More like mud wrestling. And pretending that there is no evidence in support of the efficacy of puberty...
May 26, 2025 at 01:06
You came here to prove your point, not to discuss the topic. That's fine, if tedious. What about prudence and restraint? Nuance? Context? Perhaps the ...
May 26, 2025 at 00:51
...is a prevaricating term.
May 26, 2025 at 00:35
And if it turn out to be so, your were right - but if it turns out to be wrong, then you will point to some machinations on the part of those of ill w...
May 26, 2025 at 00:27
And you know this... from examining a crystal ball? This thread is shite.
May 26, 2025 at 00:22
Would you have a philosopher evaluate your cancer biopsy? Why so long? Slow internet connection? If you would be an instant expert you might need to u...
May 26, 2025 at 00:18
That's misinformation. Not wrong, but not quite right, either. Or improved so as to avoid these complications. But again, Instant expert syndrome is a...
May 26, 2025 at 00:07
That's a bit like saying that giving blood causes Myocardial infarction. It happens, but not often. Again, this forum is not the place to evaluate the...
May 25, 2025 at 23:53
Pretty clear that \langle E_k \rangle = \frac{3}{2} k_B T is an equivalence. The "=" bit. Taking a measurement is a whole language game. There's quite...
May 25, 2025 at 23:31
Ah, well. The lounge provides me with a nice echo chamber.
May 25, 2025 at 23:19
"moderates are hijacking the devastating election loss to suit their agenda" according to Four Corners. And so it begins...
May 25, 2025 at 23:18
So the logic of your argument is much the same as that used to reject the fact of famine in Bangladesh: "You say thousands are starving, but can't nam...
May 25, 2025 at 23:09
That's quite a misrepresentation, given that what I did was to point to how temporal necessity can itself be accommodated by formal modal logic. Here'...
May 25, 2025 at 22:54
Oh, I read your reply. But I haven't read this whole thread, for obvious reasons. You are quite presumptive in your response. That to me does not bode...
May 25, 2025 at 22:29
The view from nowhere. The god's-eye view. What's being asked is, might there be some alternative? There's. lot to unravel there, but we can't start f...
May 25, 2025 at 22:05
Better to see them as stipulated. But yes, free will implies the capacity to make a choice. What do you want me to conclude from that? What remains is...
May 25, 2025 at 21:31
And the problem here - is it that they take advantage of vulnerable women, or is it that they are trans? Let's make sure we are addressing the right i...
May 25, 2025 at 21:23
Thanks. That's an excellent post. I have great respect for Malcolm, his work always gives me pause. Kripke on Heat and Sensations of Heat and Kripke a...
May 25, 2025 at 06:22
Let's take a look at how PWS deals with Caesar. "Caesar crossed the Rubicon" is possible, but not necessary. That is, there are possible worlds in whi...
May 25, 2025 at 03:22
Well, no. Rather, you haven't been able to understand what is being said. And again, this is not just my view. It is the standard approach to modality...
May 25, 2025 at 02:51
I don't think anyone here has denied that there are true sentences. Certainly not I. @"J"? @"Moliere"?
May 25, 2025 at 01:54
No. It's what "necessity" is. Something is necessarily so if it could not have been otherwise. And more. Check out the SEP article on modal logic and ...
May 25, 2025 at 01:47
Me? Never! :lol: If dogs don't understand water, why do they go to the bowl? How is it that ducks manage to land on the pond so much more often than d...
May 25, 2025 at 00:01
You've got bigger problems than that. The OG is supposed to explain why things are as they are. If the OG is compatible with every possible world, it ...
May 24, 2025 at 23:54
We'll have to disagree here. That's a somewhat ableist misinterpretation. “As the cool stream gushed over one hand she spelled into the other the word...
May 24, 2025 at 22:08
If I've understood you, you are saying that water is around before we learn about it. Yep. What I've suggested is that learning what water is and lear...
May 24, 2025 at 21:54
Because you sad as much. You have proposed a system. We've been pointing out that the consequences of that system. What has been shown is that you hav...
May 24, 2025 at 21:42
Yet So now you allow for necessary truths that could have been otherwise. That's not what a necessary truth is. The bit where I said: Again, there is ...
May 24, 2025 at 21:36
Perhaps. What is it the critic wants to conclude - that our use of the word is grounded in a pre-linguistic understanding of what water is? Perhaps we...
May 24, 2025 at 06:42
Since we are talking about Searle an Semiotics, it is worth noting that Searle's formalisation of speech acts - a semiotic theory - has had considerab...
May 24, 2025 at 06:01