You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Philosophim

Comments

Yes, you logically said that. If 'man' was seen by the majority of people as purely a gendered term, not a reference to a person's sex, then logically...
October 11, 2025 at 16:15
Good question for clarification. There is a difference between being male and female, and how one acts culturally in regards to one's sex. One simple ...
October 11, 2025 at 16:11
Much appreciated!
October 11, 2025 at 16:05
Yes, they are sex differentials. I amended gender to be more clear: Gender - A cultural expectation of non-biological behavior in regards to an indivi...
October 11, 2025 at 16:03
That is the modern day terminology in regards to transgender issues, yes. I note the definitions in the OP, do you disagree with them?
October 11, 2025 at 15:55
No, it is not an empirical fact that when people generally use the word man, that they are thinking it is equally as likely that it is an adult human ...
October 11, 2025 at 15:54
In regards to sex, yes. In regards to gender, no.
October 11, 2025 at 15:50
I disagree. Philosophy is often about unraveling statements and terms to get better clarity of definitions and what we can draw from them. "What is mi...
October 11, 2025 at 15:47
I said 'good' language. Of course we can have poor and confusing language. Are you advocating that's a good thing? Might as well throw away the field ...
October 11, 2025 at 15:44
Not a problem, Correct. But does it make sense to do so? First, we would still need a term that denotes that a person is male and adult. It makes more...
October 11, 2025 at 15:36
Correct, gender is a culturally subjective expectation of the behavior that a person should do in regards to their sex. This differentiates from objec...
October 11, 2025 at 15:31
Of course, and this depends on context. I am noting that in the general context in regards to sex and gender, 'man' refers to a person's age and sex, ...
October 11, 2025 at 15:22
Correct. We use the modifiers trans and cis to denote gender. You can be a man, and also be a cisman or transman. "Man" denotes your sex, the modifier...
October 11, 2025 at 15:16
I really appreciate you as a poster Patterner, but if you don't mind, I don't want to make this political or judgmental. This is about taking the term...
October 11, 2025 at 15:08
So I do believe that everything has inherent moral value, but some hold more value than others based on the context of the situation. A germ or bacter...
October 11, 2025 at 13:31
Every object has inherent value in comparison to there being nothing. Meaning the core of morality is that existence is better than nothing. I argue f...
October 06, 2025 at 12:24
Objectively, we are objects so that can't be the reason. Have you ever considered that we are inherently valuable because we are objects instead of no...
October 05, 2025 at 13:53
My point is I don't understand how you conclude this if you read the whole thing. Again, your comment doesn't point to what I argued in the paper, so ...
September 11, 2025 at 13:17
Then I'm going to take your disagreements with a bit less value. If you didn't read it, you probably don't understand it. Correct. But it is a reasona...
September 09, 2025 at 15:58
I'm sure you'll get plenty of pushback on limiting causality, I'm going to take another approach for you to consider. Lets say you're right. Where doe...
September 07, 2025 at 14:24
It is the ontology of consequence. Essentially I'm noting that an essential property of existence is that it 'should be'. This is a fundamental. Funda...
September 07, 2025 at 00:32
I don't think we disagree on the fundamentals here: "an Is that entails what one Ought Not to do." is what you noted, which of course logically leaves...
September 06, 2025 at 06:33
Oh, fantastic! I'll have to read it and reply later.
September 05, 2025 at 04:08
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15203/in-any-objective-morality-existence-is-inherently-good/p1 The above is the full argument so you can un...
September 05, 2025 at 04:07
The only way to reason to come necessary baseline of an objective good (if it exists) is take the ultimate question of "should there be any existence ...
September 04, 2025 at 03:23
And yet non-existence means that if good exists, that would mean the destruction of good. Good by definition is what should exist, so it would never b...
September 03, 2025 at 11:19
Certainly. Existence is good, and it can be measured by actual and potential over time. Morality in human terms is simply an expression of morality th...
September 03, 2025 at 11:15
A subjective morality devolves into opinion, which means there is no morality that anyone should reasonably listen to. When you state morality is subj...
August 30, 2025 at 15:14
I believe that if one is to believe that there is an objective morality, the one thing we can consider is that existence vs non-existence is good. Pro...
August 30, 2025 at 14:31
I didn't mean you, I was commenting on Wittgenstein.
August 14, 2025 at 21:42
The problem with JTB boils down to the definitions. True - What is truth? If knowledge requires truth, then don't we run into a problem that we also h...
August 14, 2025 at 17:59
Incorrect. Hallucinations can also involve external stimulus. "Hallucinations are false perceptions of sensory experiences. Some hallucinations are no...
August 09, 2025 at 19:10
Just ensuring the accuracy of terms as you mentioned. Just because a physicalist can hold these arguments, this doesn't make someone who holds an argu...
August 07, 2025 at 13:01
How so? "Physicalism is, in slogan form, the thesis that everything is physical. The thesis is usually intended as a metaphysical thesis, parallel to ...
August 07, 2025 at 09:14
Very true. Agreed. And this is often a problem I have with broad generalized terms. The general definition of a physicalist is "One who thinks everyth...
August 07, 2025 at 07:31
From all the debates over it, apparently understanding it! I jest. The 'Easy problem" could more easily be called "The objective problem" of conscious...
August 07, 2025 at 04:29
Well too bad, I'm going to respect you still for making a good follow up post. :) I think there might have been a misunderstanding between us. If you ...
August 06, 2025 at 18:00
No, it is not my responsibility to hear a claim from you and do all the work. You provide a claim, you explain with evidence why that claim fits, and ...
August 06, 2025 at 05:49
Ok, you need to present why you think that. I looked it up briefly and my points don't fit what you claim. Please point out why. I'm also a bit put ab...
August 06, 2025 at 05:22
We might be going around a little, and that's fine. Its not been an unpleasant go-around, but we might be coming to an irreconcilable rift in the conv...
August 06, 2025 at 00:28
I may not have communicated this clearly then. No, both states would affect each other. Let me be clear. Lets say that to get vision A, we have two ne...
August 05, 2025 at 19:54
Yes, its possibly physical. But this gradient is entirely theoretical, and to me, still has the 'pullling' problem that I spoke about. Appreciate your...
August 05, 2025 at 17:58
I wasn't quite clear on what you wanted, so I'll state what I thought you said. We've seen the results from property dualism, now you want to imagine ...
August 05, 2025 at 05:58
You have to be very careful here. We have tons of information about the brain and objective consciousness. We can clearly see brain states influencing...
August 05, 2025 at 05:48
Actually, there is. We have to be careful to not confuse 'plausible' with logical reason that it exists. First, there needs to be an indication of som...
August 04, 2025 at 18:15
What did you mean by perdurable? No I haven't seen an indicator that thoughts are necessarily non-physical. Why is water wet? Go ahead, touch some. Wh...
August 04, 2025 at 17:58
The only reason why we don't understand that is because we can't know what its like to subjectively experience as that thing. If we had that, we could...
August 04, 2025 at 17:51
Great topic, especially the ten commandments in writing philosophy.
August 04, 2025 at 13:29
No because you have to have a clear definition of non-physical, and then clear evidence that exists as something not actually physical. We're putting ...
August 04, 2025 at 13:24
So what causation is, "A prior state which necessarily lead to the current state" itself would not change. But we just don't know how something non-ph...
August 04, 2025 at 13:19