fdrake

Nah. God's infinite, obviously. That's how I understand him. That's why God is real.

I have an idea of being with some ideality and actuality in it - as all beings -, brought about by the gaps of unfulfilled potentials. In my head, I i...

And you read me as supportive of ontological arguments and the idea that concepts alone can vouchsafe a being's actuality?

I don't understand the context of the response. Do you think you're debunking a theist?

I wanted to respond to this, from your posts and Deleuze studies I believe you think of existence univocally. How do you deal with different strata li...

Doing something with an ideal object in a manner which treats it as ideal, like imagining a snark, is a lot different from doing something that treats...

Had the same feeling, think we've covered everything interesting. :)

I don't know if skeptical hypotheses as a treatment for pernicious intuitions actually pans out. The thread title is literally "BIV was meant undermin...

So you view the skeptic as a kind of philosophical barometer for bullshit? If a position allows radical skeptical arguments to be applied to it - or a...

The distinction between actual and ideal things is usually subordinated in the argument through a relation with undetermined scope. In the 'greater th...

Ontological arguments are examples of summoning magic.They work in the same way as a chaos magic summoning ritual, an array of symbols (premises and t...

'actually understanding what the terms mean' still implicates contextualised learning. There's the classic example of 'all bachelors are unmarried men...

In what contexts does self evidence arise? Taken literally, it would mean a claim is evidence of itself. Examples of this are 'This sentence is in Eng...

I'm opposed to transcendent Gods on logical grounds and the supernatural on methodological ones. I'm not that sympathetic to theism or theology in gen...

What made you peg me as an anti-theist? I had to leave university for a year since I couldn't walk even short distances, especially with all the hills...

Yes. I literally lived with a nun for a year.

I try not to find anything pointless.

People wasting their time in different ways is why forums like this remain interesting.

Having understood the totality of belief systems operative within every single humanities subject and some arguments in human developmental biology, t...

It's not really that difficult if you've done any research on the terms. Wheesht. Rhizomatic is an adjective to describe, simultaneously, a way of thi...

It only makes sense if 'you' is an every-person. Why would whether Cartesian skepticism works the same for know-how as know-that turn on my analysis o...

It's funny that you're using 'you' and 'I' there to refer to precisely the same person; yourself viewed as the modifier of skeptical scenarios (the sk...

@"StreetlightX" (for shared interest in Laruelle) Holding or studying JTB is neither necessary nor sufficient for responding to skepticism, the point ...

I remember it happening too. Is why I brought it up. The most interesting part of the thought experiment is that it's ok for 'the skeptic' to do but n...

Nick Bostrom's simulation argument isn't seeking to undermine all claims to knowledge, though. We have to know stuff about the universe and be able to...

Allowing the skeptic their innocent imaginings is already giving them enough rope to hang you. We do have knowledge; so the skeptic is wrong in any ca...

If it wasn't part of the established tradition of philosophy, it would be given the credit it's worth: nothing. No one seriously entertains the idea, ...

That's a lot more words to say the same thing. It's a more plausible delusion to think that a mad scientist has made us into a brain in a vat than one...

It amuses me that it's OK to entertain the possibility and the concurrent belief that entertaining the possibility destroys all knowledge, but it's no...

It's a daemon's power fantasies playing out in a holodeck in which he creates BIVs impregnated with the idea that they're all in the Matrix.

Conditional: brain in vats and memory editing. Should be believed? Nah. Kind of thing people can get therapy for.

I think that's a difference between BIV and the daemon. The daemon has a malicious streak and doesn't even grant us the capacity to think or feel as n...

I agree. Talking about drawing circles is a bit of a red herring. What matters is whether someone could square a circle in the simulation.

Whatever you want to call it -real, ideal, virtual, a platonic object, other things-, our mathematics has a specific value of Pi. A computer simulatin...

Assume someone has drawn a circle in the real world, and there's a circle in the simulated world. Both have the same diameter. Do they have the same c...

Reality does. It's Pi here, it's an approximation of Pi in simulated universes with finite memory. We could go round in circles playing the 'frame wha...

Yes. Since they have different values for Pi.

I really don't understand how this is relevant. Why do you think the ability to draw a circle in general is relevant to the computer's capacity to squ...

I don't see the relevance of this. The computer could have a value for Pi so accurate that its error is below the Plank length for a circle with the d...

But I suppose if you were to measure circle diameters and circumferences, you would observe a different value for Pi than the one we get. Edit: with s...

Modality man. Modality. The computer COULD do it, 'our' computer COULDN'T.

It's the computer's ability to draw a square which has the same area as a given circle using compass and straight edge which is the problem in the fir...

In our thoughts and mathematical operations, proofs: the whole ideational system of mathematics must be something the simulating computer does. This m...

Let's put it this way: In the simulated universe, the area of a circle is yR^2, in our universe, the area of a circle is xR^2. They literally have dif...

It isn't that they wouldn't be able to read the proof. The strings could be arranged on the page in the same manner. It's just that that proof would n...

So, there are two Pis. Let's call our Pi x and a simulated Pi y. Let's also assume that y is equal to the first 3 decimal places of x. IE y=3.141 y is...

This is what it means to be unable to square a circle: it is impossible to construct a square with exactly the same area as a given circle using only ...

Did you read the Wiki page on squaring the circle?

It isn't a perceptual difference. It's akin to a law of nature. Argument goes as follows: Assume (A) we are in a simulation, then consider the followi...

It would need to be able to generate any set of surroundings. This goes beyond being a procedurally generated universe, as it would have to generate t...