ToothyMaw

CRT only atm. I'll have to do some more reading.

I agree, but we do not have maximum opportunity, and it doesn't look like equal rights is going to get us there any time soon.

Oh god, oh Jesus, oh sweet baby Jesus, I'm just being trolled, thank god.

Well, if a woman grabs you by the crotch and you don't like it - I guess you aren't a real man.

That is pretty fucked up, dude. A real man?

Seriously? They are exactly the same as everyone else; they are just primates with pretty standard preferences attempting to lead happy lives; they ar...

For many atheists, however, who are not connoisseurs of fine philosophy, atheism is the denial of the existence of god, even if the more educated ones...

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother with this kind of stuff. And I don't know why this thread just got popular, it's like a year old.

It never hurts a conversation to cell your interlocutor a nazi :up: .

How is a frozen embryo a child, let alone a person (philosophically)? If it isn't a person it isn't murder, it is just killing. Furthermore, if you be...

That is an idiotic assertion. The word derives itself from the concept in the definition. That's like calling the definition of ornithology circular f...

Essentially I'm saying this: you claim all of the factors that affect our character, and thus actions, are external to the will. One of those elements...

correction: later states of the world can be seen as fixing earlier states of the world; I'm no physicist.

What I'm saying here is that at some specific way things were in the past at a time t, we can say that what ensues from there that results in one's in...

I assume you will dispute my definition of determinism

Great analysis.

Furthermore, your assertion that if we come into existence then we are not responsible for our initial character implies you believe that all other ev...

To say that one is not morally responsible for those things seems to me to be rendering them external to the will, and if those are the only things th...

You appear to believe that determinism is a necessary truth, however. Or at least you presume so in your argument. I don't see how you can say that de...

Then you understood what I was trying to say enough to realize that I was accusing you of a modal fallacy, and that that was what I was trying to expr...

Define aseity, then.

No, I argued that aseity implies free will, which then implies moral responsibility. You use this premise: To support the assertion that we have free ...

So you are saying that if we have free will we are morally responsible, right? I assume that that is what you mean. Furthermore, how does that argumen...

If you say that it is not logically necessary that we are morally responsible, then there must be alternatives to being morally responsible by us exis...

I mean I could say: 1. It is logically necessary that(if one makes a crappy analogy, then they should be ashamed of themselves). 2. One makes a crappy...

Unless I'm mistaken you do indeed use the argument: 1. If we exist with aseity, we have free will. 2. We exist with aseity. 3. Therefore, we have free...

I don't dispute that argument. The argument I dispute is formed from this: 1. If we have free will, we exist with aseity 2. We have free will 3. There...

Don't tear me apart, I'm correcting my earlier post

In order for the Santa argument not to be fallacious you must have a rule that accounts for the fact that the past might have been different; you coul...

I suppose I would say that seriousness is an attention to principles and a fact-based dialectic.

Any measure of what it means to be a philosopher has to be measured against what one intends; if you engage in philosophical discussions to stimulate ...

You could always just eat the cookies yourself, or hit Santa with a baseball bat for invading your home; the argument suffers from the fatalist fallac...

I derived this from your argument, so if anything is wrong just say so (this is my first try at an argument like this): 1. It is logically necessary t...

I can't really dispute the aseity argument, but I can dispute whether or not we have aseity, and I think that if you agree that our initial, current, ...

As if the cake analogy wasn't enough.

You took your name from that one lecture, right? I watched a little bit of it.

I no longer stick to the arguments I made in the opening post. I think that moral responsibility is plausible.

btw, I'm not a philosopher, nor even experienced in writing philosophy. I've written a couple of essays, but that's it. And I usually am wrong, it see...

Maybe if you ground it in god? I don't know. I'll have to think about it.

I will look into some of his philosophy. I would never have expected to sound like a theologian.

So the future really does depend on our choices.

I didn't argue for determinism. I argued that unless determinism is proven false, we would have no basis for moral responsibility. It turns out I was ...

Agency still exists even if determinism is true. It is (usually) fallacious to say something like that we cannot affect the future, and thus the amoun...

I mean if someone makes such a damaging argument that people want to murder them, then that's a reflection of how emotionally vulnerable people are, n...

It wouldn't bother me in the least if you did. Perhaps. I'm formulating some new views on the matter. I think that even if we don't have moral culpabi...

I'll check it out. To be honest, I don't read nearly as much as I should. And I'm often intimidated by rigorous arguments. But I'll try to get through...

I mean maybe I will have to admit it exists

Sorry, not maybe might

Looks like moral responsibility might exist!

I mean if character is defined in that way I think it accounts for (1) and (2), but the ramifications it has for agency are pretty implausible, yes.