Marty

I don't think so.

Like, just advocating for a form of pluralism? I suppose that is interesting, Streetlight. Although, I'm just skeptical of it.

I'm not espousing a form of pragmatism, no. I've honestly never been able to make much sense of that. It seems evidently clear that the world around u...

I was thinking this, but then it would be strange because truth would be determined by how one chooses to begin philosophy, and at the bottom there wo...

How is it irrelevant? Presumably, you place all those things into the category of physical because you understand what the physical is. But now you cl...

Spinoza offered a pretty solid demonstration of how two substances are impossible. A substance cannot be determined outside of it's attributes and mod...

Look, I've been on these forums since they've been built. And then I read the post on the ones prior to this before this one was built. I know the env...

Look are you gonna answer the question of what the physical/matter is, or are you gonna avoid that question? Because all that seems to be irrelevant u...

The question is whether meaning is material. Its probably not. If it is for you, then I'm not sure how far you're extending the meaning of material to...

I'm not asking for disagreement. Though I had a friend recently give me his spin on it:

The point isn't whether or not our decisions are motivated (influenced) by the world, the point is whether our decisions are over-determined by extern...

Historically, mechanism failed to account for intentional actions and actions-at-a-distance (formal-final causes). I remember reading Schelling w.r.t ...

Thanks, Streetlight. That makes sense to me.

, I'm still somewhat curious as to what you have to say about my question about the set of all fundamental particles being able to account for all cau...

Well. This would be the set of all fundamental particles. Not a aggerate within a certain area. What then?

Out of curiosity, do you have any way to avoid this type of reductionism? Because it seems like once we make this reduction - into the particle world ...

Interesting, UC. I'll think about it for a bit.

Yes. Casual disposition cannot fail to accord to a certain standard, whereas intentions can. Intentions... intend to some action which can fail.

Its not equivocation. There's plenty of philosophers who see desires, beliefs and intentions as normative. I can't distinguish what you're talking abo...

I'm not seeing the problem, Ernestm. Being conflicted about your desires doesn't make the desires unconscious, it just means you have conflicting desi...

The common usage of the word is used ambiguously, MU. Surely you're not suggesting that the dictionary is the arbitrator of philosophical language?

Well, I think your interlocutor here can just say something to the effect of the desire is equivalent to the will insofar as one has to choose to desi...

The feeling of hunger isn't a desire. It's a casual disposition. I don't desire to feel hunger, I am hungry and as a consequence I desire to eat. Once...

The illusion is acknowledged to be not an illusion in virute of a belief that overcomes the prior experience. It's not that we don't experience the il...

In virute of what do you make this claim, though? It seems prima-facie binary: one is conscious -- we experience it -- and the other is unconscious --...

Wayfarer, that's fine. But how's that related? I'm not denying that the brain alternates perceptual structures in some form. I mean, Hering Illusions ...

The notion was that these only make sense w.r.t consciousness. What does it mean for normative states - intentions, beliefs, and desires - to be uncon...

But control is also constitutive of agency. That requires intentions, beliefs, and desires - which are a part of the consciousness.

Yes, that's the distinction between Dasein and the ontic. And it's obviously not "special pleading", as Heidegger writes thousands of pages dividing t...

If anyone is interested in a live philosophy chatroom I've constructed one around four months back with a lot of members discussing ideas from mainly ...

Well, it's particular type of "thing" - namely the entire world. Definitely not an object/subject in the usual sense, but it's surely not a concept. C...

I'm honestly fairly perplexed. Why is this a categorical error? Why is applying the PSR, when applied to a generality fail? Would you mind formalizing...

Oh yeah, Hegel and Schelling liked their Jacob Boehme and Meister Eckhart. Probably have to read both of those thinkers to understand them.

How Kierkegaardian. I share this thought of time too. I think it's breifly in The Concept of Anxiety? If I understand it correctly, it's a type of pre...

Maybe I missed something, but is there a reason you want to do the introduction last?

To be honest, and I don't think it's the greatest defense there is, but I do think that obviously what Heidegger had to overcome required a completely...

I'm not sure. Late and middle Schelling also gets very mystical, so I'm not sure if we can blame it entirely on Hegel. Holderlin, Hegel, and Schelling...

No. Fichte is the clearest German Idealist.

Same. There's something about Heidegger's writing which I found particularly lucid and brilliant - though it takes sometime to get used to. I don't fe...

I'm not sure how you're going to reduce the present-at-hand to the ready-to-hand because we just seem to operate in the world with both modes - as int...

I'm still not sure what this means, and I asked four people to clarify your post - none of them could make sense of it either. I'm not trying to be di...

I see. I thought I addressed this, but I myself wouldn't defend the Kalam cosmological argument all the way through. I was addressing the classic cosm...

I'm not sure how you can say this, though. That the concern for power structure is a "modern thing." Beginning somewhere from some of the earliest his...

It's related to our prior conversation when I said God is completely transcendent. Any way, I'm mustering up a reply to this...

Real quick: It seems like what you want is an ethical theory that can ground, but isn't that the very thing that Levinas wants to say is impossible? T...

Can you elaborate further? I'm not sure what you mean. It seems if the cosmological argument proves the universe to be contingent it necessarily impli...

Hey, I can't answer this all right now, so I might aim for tomorrow. Is an instantaneous cause temporal, though? I mean, I don't think so. Something t...

(Accidently double posted... Please delete)

Yes. They're challenged for being grounded. But they're not grounded. Ethics are shown in the absence of being, in what it's not. In the sense of what...

But Levinas never says ethics is up for grabs. That's why justice is radically Other. So if Justice is radically other they can't be for everyone to d...