PuerAzaelis

Bump.

TYVM

"To know the good is to do the good"?

George Cantor

Hello everybody Is there a way to Mark all Read and then select only Show Unread posts?

nvm

There is no particular reason I can think of that an ethical "natural law" would require a deity to be its efficient cause. We do not doubt that the l...

It's not over yet. Biden came back. Bernie could come back too.

Indeed that is the argument, I think, Wittgenstein is making - that there is indeed no such thing as a private language.

For a philosophy of humor you would first need a philosophy of humorlousness: For many, especially the young, discovering a new meaning in the midst o...

If i am having an occurrence of a perception of a red object, I am certain that the perception is of red.

Almighty Wiki puts this well: Wittgenstein explains this unintelligibility with a series of analogies. For example, in section 265 he observes the poi...

In other words, the question "what kind of rule can I use to determine whether or not my use of my private language is proper?" can only be answered b...

I've been re-reading those section of PI and trying to further clarify. The argument seems to be like this: If I was on a desert island, utilizing "s"...

Isn't that how all language works anyway? Words and meanings change through time, but not just for private objects - for public objects too.

That same way I would check the meaning of any public language terms. If i am on a desert island and I write "tree" whenever I see a tree, then I have...

Yay the five year old has disproved Wittgenstein.

As long as I used the term in a coherent manner, I would have to say I am using it "correctly", according to my own rules. For example, if I am on a d...

But why should that mean that a private language is also unintelligible to me, its user?

I take umbrage at the suggestion that I am as intelligent as a five year old. Five year olds are much smarter than I am. If you want my question to be...

In the section of Philosophical investigations pertaining to the private language argument.

TY Banno yes I read the Stanford entry and unfortunately it did not cure my confusion. Unfortunately I seem to have a simplistic and childish brain - ...

So if I understand correctly, this "relativism" with respect to language means not only that noone can understand my private language but also that I ...

Do you think we are approaching a kind of technology singularity, like Kurzweil says?

Why is it apparently never enough simply to say that I cannot doubt the occurrence of certain experiences? We can build our knowledge up from our own ...

Ty. But no takers, huh. Maybe noone understands it.

The problem with all this is that "same/different" does not necessarily include "affirm/negate". in other words, when we say something is the same as ...

TY all

My experience is good and coherent enough for me. I'll roll the dice based on that.

I can directly point to my experience of it. My experience of it exists.

TY!

There are many categories of indeterminacy. One of them is epistemological the other is physical.

I am here, I am now, I have the appearance of certain things occurring.

What does he mean when he says that verificationism is "anti-realism"?

I like it! In traditional Christianity as i understand it, the Devil is not omnipotent. He is a powerful fallen angel, but is not all-powerful. So the...

What are the axioms of belief which are free from doubt?

What if it is one of the very few things that do actually matter?

Lol.

Then affirmation negates its sameness as negation, which is impossible.

It is easy to be cynical. I tend to be more cynical about people's capabilities. I don't think people are clever enough to be part of a conscious olig...

Why can't foundationalism apply at least to phenomenological occurrences such as "I am currently looking at a computer screen"?

What reason do you have to doubt all axioms?

If Aquinas were asked the question of the OP, he might have said, no, the belief in God is not properly basic, since although the belief that there is...

2+2=4. Torturing babies for pleasure is morally wrong.

Aquinas is not so bad.

In pondering the behavior of our complex, law-abiding universe, it is as if we were watching a group of people running around randomly, and suddenly a...

On the contrary, No one can mentally admit the opposite of what is self-evident; as the Philosopher (Metaph. iv, lect. vi) states concerning the first...