The Great Whatever

I don't know, because I've never tried fruitcake (that I can remember).

I think I would need to be given a reason to think they're different.

What is more objective than looking at something and seeing that it's beautiful? Aren't all methods of inquiry in some sense observational like this?

Do you always think you're wrong, or there's no fact of the matter, juyt because someone disagrees with you? People have different opinions, that's pe...

Like what? Can you walk me through how they work, and how they differ from non-scientific methods? No; whether the object is beautiful is. Of course, ...

Why would the culture's opinions matter? Just because someone has an opinion that p, doesn't mean that p. No?

Uh, I don't know. I would have to know what song you were talking about.

Shouldn't you look at (or otherwise experience) the thing itself, to find out if it's beautiful, rather than asking or observing whether people find i...

Sure, but I don't think it's likely. Haven't you ever changed your mind about something? But I've invoked no authority at all. You have said yourself ...

Yes, but only because I generally believe in my own epistemic faultiness. Because of the nature of belief, I can't pick out any single moral belief I ...

I don't think the two are synonymous, although a decent person is probably repulsed by wrong things generally. 'Repulsive' can be relativized to group...

I don't deny this, but isn't this true of anything? I behold rocks as solid because of the sort of creature I am, right?

I'm not sure about this. It seems to me that certain things are beautiful and others less so, or not. Isn't this a kind of realism about aesthetics? C...

Interesting – I think that's a counterintuitive classification, but okay, I can't prevent people from drawing classifications as they please. In any c...

I think you have an idiosyncratic interpretation of what moral realism is, so this conversation isn't fruitful. I can let shmik answer for whether he ...

This seems to me an idiosyncratic definition of moral realism. What is your source on it? If you have an idiosyncratic view on the matter, that's fine...

Are you an anti-realist about the claims of human psychology? Are facts about human psychology established by 'impersonal features of the world?'

??? So you don't think it's wrong to torture children? You disagree with that claim? Wouldn't this make you some kind of psychopath though? Surely you...

But this just makes no sense. Following this line of thought, we have to be anti-realists about all claims of human psychology, since those are 'mind-...

This seems to be confused; it supposes that features of people are not 'objective features of the world.' Again, the question of which objective featu...

Is that the issue? I thought the issue was whether there are 'moral facts' or not? Nothing about the mind was mentioned. Are mental states not 'real p...

What does it matter whether it's 'dependent on the mind' or not? If you don't think torturing kids is wrong, but you pretend to think that so others d...

So you don't think torturing children is wrong, but it's convenient to act like it's wrong? Or, you do 'legitimately believe it,' but only when you're...

So it is truth apt, but not ultimately truth apt? What is the difference between being truth apt and ultimately truth apt? I ask because the default p...

So is the idea "if there is an objective X, we can't disagree about X?" But that's nonsense, right?

1) "It's wrong to torture children." This is a moral claim, and it's also true. So there are true moral claims. 2) "It's wrong to torture children" is...

But look, this is a ridiculous question. Surely you do think there are ways you should act?

Moral realism IMO is the default position. Moral claims can be made using natural language, and they're just as truth-evaluable as any other sort of c...

Yes, you're roughly bracketing what a linguist would call the 'constituent structure' of the sentence: you get bracketings like this in intro linguist...

Your metaphysics is probably a retroactive expression of your behavior/outlook.

The APA is basically a religious organization, let's be honest. No philosophy takes place outside of that sort of framework. Your typical middle class...

All I am asking of you is to read what people have actually written before you go off. I'm fine if you disagree with me, or even think I'm an idiot. W...

You haven't read the thread, because if you did, you'd realize this was false. As well as how absurd it was to point out the existence of the Refutati...

Yes, it is. My retort wasn't hyperbole; it was a response to yours. I mean, look at this: Kant was just one man. The whole discipline preceded him, an...

And so no proof of necessity has been given. Note that the Humean Pyrrhonist can say the same thing. I haven't read that section of the Critique in ye...

The God thing is irrelevant. Kant was simply mistaken that his epistemological position, and his position regarding the empirical reality versus trans...

It's laughable to claim that philosophers before Kant didn't 'deeply analyze the processes of reason...' etc. 'Unlike them?' I'm sorry, this is just t...

As we find ourselves experiencing – but this 'finding ourselves' – the faculties we happen to have, for no discernible reason, are still potentially c...

I had in mind his response to Hobbes (I think it was) when he claimed that the cogito wasn't a syllogism as such, but a sort of bootstrapping intuitio...

I think a classical rationalist would deny this. In fact Kant didn't show that – he postulated it, but there's nothing to show that the way our facult...

That is a (highly specific) philosophical position, not an ordinary uncontroversial fact. Yes. Yes, that's what I meant. There are literally too many ...

This strikes me as a verbal dispute. By 'not beyond perception' I did not intend to limit myself to 'objects of perception.' Though there seems to be ...

In fact, to understand Kant, you must understand that it was the attempt to empiricize especially causality that he was reacting against. Again, situa...

But Kant didn't invent the aprioricity of time, space and causality. These are old rationalist notions. My point is we tend to be ahistorical in discu...

---- It's misleading to call space and time 'non-perceptual' in Kant's sense, because although they aren't objects of perception, they are conditions ...

I'm not sure I committed myself to claiming you perceive space, but the contention is purely verbal: to perceive objects in their spatial relations is...

Ideal, meaning not independent of their perception. What is perceptual doesn't need to be a priori.

Locke – Lockean substance is the thing-in-itself, reduction of traditional metaphysical categories to epistemological categories of man, project of di...

I think it's a reactionary text that systematizes the thoughts of more innovative thinkers, and in doing so reduces them to make room for more traditi...

Agreed! His presence in the curriculum is mostly to serve as a figure that's been transcended. But most of the people who take him to be passe are a l...