Bunji

I think you are right that my defence of KILPOD does threaten to collapse that distinction, and that threat is present in Wittgenstein's own account i...

In order to correctly label it an elephant, you need to know that the thing you point to is an elephant. So you at least need to know what an elephant...

First of all, the subject of discussion to which you refer was between myself and jkg20. Only you are insisting that I keep shifting the subject from ...

This simply begs the question of what proposition is actually being expressed. Knowing that x is an ant is not separable from knowing what "ant" means...

Who's trying to deny it?

"A=B & B not = A" is a logical contradiction. It doesn't provide us with knowledge because it's nonsense. But if I say "Elephants are different from a...

"I think, therefore I am", is not a logically valid argument. To be valid it would need to take the form "If I think, then I exist. I think, therefore...

The subject here is Cartesian doubt, which I am not trying to justify. Quite the reverse. According to Descartes the only certainty I have about THAT ...

Do you think the earth is orbiting the sun?

But it is precisely the meaning of "no ant is an elephant" that is open to the logical possibility of doubt! Knowing what the terms "ant" and "elephan...

Well yes, the logical possibility of doubt exists here, because to know that no ant is an elephant it's necessary to know what an ant is and what an e...

Absolutely not. His big mistake is to think that a foundation of indubitable certainty is required for knowledge. The kind of indubitable certainty he...

Medical research can be funded by the state. Can wealthy-powerful pharmaceutical companies be trusted to serve the public interest when, for example, ...

Not necessarily. The idea that the Earth orbits the Sun is true, so it's not a fiction. An idea, belief, proposition, is a product of the mind, but if...

But the "certainty" Descartes arrives at isn't knowledge! KILPOD - knowledge implies the logical possibility of doubt.

Ludwig Wittgenstein was born into one of the wealthiest families in Europe. He gave all his share of the wealth to his brother, because, being the ver...

Why is there something rather than nothing? Because if there were nothing at all you wouldn't be able to ask the question.

Sorry for the delayed reply, I was out all day yesterday. I said it was a hypothetical imperative! According to Kant, hypothetical imperatives are not...

A maxim is I suppose a limited sort of principle, in that it is a determination to always do a particular thing under particular circumstances; but it...

I disagree. A principle can be posited as a necessary ground (for moral action), and it remains a principle even if that principle is judged not to be...

There's a lot of misunderstanding going on here. To judge a principle of necessity would simply be to judge whether it is in fact a principle of neces...

The judgement concerns what one's duty is. The idea of moral judgement is central to Kantian ethics, which is deontological.

You're welcome!

A sharp is/ought or fact/value divide is a specifically Humean feature designed to fit Hume's belief-desire theory of motivation. Moral realists under...

Deontology (internalist): If an action is right, then it is intrinsically right; if it is wrong, then it is intrinsically wrong. Consequentialism (ext...

By elucidating what science is, to what extent its procedures are rational and how it's methods achieve knowledge, in contrast to other "methods" of t...

Interesting OP. Dissatisfaction with R. M. Hare's prescriptivism was the starting point for some very interesting developments in moral cognitivism by...

Everyone seems to be going along with the Cartesian assumption that knowledge requires certainty; that the edifice of knowledge must be built on a fou...

Interesting point. Gettier's claim is that the JTB definition can be satisfied (e.g. by the example you give), yet still not count as knowledge. But i...

This is a confusion of three separate questions concerning three different areas of philosophy: ontology, epistemology and ethics. The question of you...

So you join a philosophy forum to test your ideas. Great, that makes sense. That means listening to other people - it's other people's criticisms, val...

Then why join a philosophy forum?

Why would I be interested in what's "true for me"? How can I even make sense of that? The Donald Trump definition of truth: What is true is whatever w...