Janus

I don't know what you are trying to say or imply here, To say what the dog is thinking just is an attempt to get into the mind of the dog. We are alre...

The one point we disagree about is this. We have many justified beliefs, no doubt some more justified than others. Justification is contextual as I ha...

Yes, I agree to that. :grin:

I don't know what else to tell you; it makes perfect sense to me. Do you mean that you don't understand what I am saying? Perhaps an example would hel...

I think they do represent or misrepresent our always already symbolically enbaled thinking. Of course any symbolic enabled thinking if it is apt is ba...

I guess comparing their behavior to ours and then observing what we are thinking when we behave whatever way it is that we are comparing.

I think it is reasonable to say that animals who cannot use symbolic language behave as though they are doing something which we could refer to as 'th...

Ah, so you're asking for an explanation! :wink: How it follows from what? From your presuppositions, I suppose! :roll: You would need to know a little...

What a convoluted load of bullshit! Arguments do not "hinge on whether something is an explanation": all arguments are explanations and explications o...

No, I don't see that. As I said a few posts ago, I think the most we can do is "gesture at it" which means to speculate more or less blindly or wildly...

Interesting! That seems to raise a question: if at the non-linguistic cognitive level of the dog there is no distinction between thinking and believin...

I don't see how this criticism is relevant. If God is a necessary being, then everything about him is necessary. If God is a triune being with Jesus b...

I agree that our dialogue has been steadily improving; which is a good thing. And I have begun to enjoy our conversations, and to learn and sharpen my...

Wow, I actually agree with what you are saying here. Or rather what you are saying is a reiteration in different words of what @"creativesoul" and I h...

All you are really saying is that different arguments depend on different presuppositions, as I already pointed out. If the presuppositions are too mu...

OK, but the point for me is not that we can know, with any absolute certainty, that our beliefs are true in any absolute sense; but rather to unpack t...

I don't share your confidence about this. We can impute, from the standpoint inherent to our linguistically based reasoning, particular thoughts or be...

I really must away so I'll have to leave it until tomorrow, creative. :smile:

See, again here I'd rather just say "a creature capable of associating different things" because the association may be (I'd venture to say probably i...

The fact that the latter has determinate content, insofar as it can be expressed verbally. TBH I'd rather dispense with belief/ believing and stick to...

1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes and no. "No" because I am not comfortable with speaking about "content" of "pre-linguistic thought/ belief". I would instead spea...

I agree, since I don't believe the biological in general can be coherently reduced to the mechanical, even if some biological processes can be fruitfu...

Yes, the "justified" would seem to be relevant only to the context in which justification can be given, which would obviously not be the context of pr...

That's right! When new facts emerge or new observations are made what was a justified false belief may no longer be justified, and if held onto, will ...

I don't think this is right; there may be justified false beliefs, as in the example of the cardboard cutout sheep in a paddock I referred to a couple...

Anything not understood appears to be magic. There will always be plenty of mystery. Where I diverge from your way is that I do not reify the fact of ...

The actual point there is that what might be seen as the "telos" emerges naturally from within complex systems, and you want to misread that to suppor...

OH, of course! Now why didn't I see that? :wink: :joke:

So Helena should try the academics instead because there's more wisdom there?

Illuminating post, Fooloso4! :cool: And again...finally! :up: Way to cut through the crap!

OK, but it still seems reasonable to ask if there is a cogent distinction there. I'm not convinced there is. I mean we can stipulate whatever we like,...

Yes, although this approach does not advocate believing that evolution is intentional in the kind of way that human actions may be intentional. The ki...

It is justified by the sentiment that H. sapiens is not just another animal, but our kind of animal. This is analogous to way the different kinds of s...

We know about human meanings of human actions; we can barely speculate about the different meanings of actions for the different kinds of animals.

Social animals may behave aggressively towards one another within groups, but they generally act "sociably", (and with kindness to their own kind, for...

Here you go again conflating the sensible idea that morality evolved (and that moral behavior is not unique to humans) with the silly idea that morali...

Yes, I agree that the Gettier "problems" are "ridiculous" because they deal with beliefs in a confusingly abstract "de-natured" kind of way. I find it...

Yes, Descartes is a pivotal figure in the development of the idea of ontological dualism, the radical separation that begins with Plato. That dualism,...

Right, so first you make a claim (that the number 2 exists only as a brain state) and when I ask you for an argument in the way of explanatory support...

I read several and found nothing interesting, illuminating or relevant to what I understood we were "discussing" there.

So "rules for explanations" is not "what...(you)... mean by explanation"?

Can we posit any cogent distinctions between these "simulations" and reflexive awareness, cognitive equipment, knowledge of self and introspective bas...

I don't see phenomenology that way. I see it as a search for, and discovery of, ways of understanding that stand or fall only in virtue of their intui...

I never said "uncountable" I said uncounted.. We both agree that there are integers which have never been spoken nor thought about (counted). But you ...

OK, but the metaphor seemed to be evoking an analogy with fish swimming in water, which is their sole medium, so I thought that was what you were comi...

Yes, this attitude is very consistent with the idea of reason being sharpened by experience (which is indeed a kind of externally imposed critique), a...

Reason is but one aspect of human life; it is by no means the sole medium we "swim in". It is good that reason should be "demoted" in my view; who (ap...

I'm not much interested in supporting one metaphysical theory over another; for me the interest in metaphysical thinking lies in what we can imagine. ...

That is nothing unique, though; the truth of any theory cannot be tested. My point, in any case, was that IF it is true that evolution has honed the e...

No, I don't believe that what helps us survive is necessarily therefore the truth. My contention was more modest: that the general efficacy of reason ...