Michael

I don't think many moral subjectivists would agree. Richard Brandt in Ethical theory; the problems of normative and critical ethics says " have been u...

Unforunately the software doesn't allow for that, which incidentally was our preference.

Fun fact, I was in East Berlin the night the wall came down.

So they didn’t support a wall; they supported a fence.

Downvotes weren't actually an option, just upvotes. The main issue was that there was a cumulative total on a user's profile and an option on the memb...

It was 3 years ago. Maybe @"jamalrob" will be open to a new vote now that we're a much bigger community with many more members.

Here was the discussion/vote. Yes, go the the category (e.g. https://thephilosophyforum.com/categories/7/philosophy-of-religion) and at the bottom of ...

We used to have this feature but we voted to remove it.

Even then, does it matter? Does the validity of an argument depend on the subject? Surely something like modus ponens is valid whatever terms are subs...

Do moral subjectivists claim that moral statements are imperatives? If not then this critique on the internal consistency of moral subjectivism doesn'...

You derived the conclusion that the subjectivist cannot claim their view to be true from the premise that two contradictory views can both be right if...

So I can’t claim that my view that liquorice is disgusting is true because some people like it?

Is it special pleading when the realist says we have evidence of material things but not of magic or the supernatural?

They can argue that we have evidence of things other than one's self (as the realist does) but also that the notion of material things is incoherent, ...

The nature of sense-data (or "qualia") is a difficult subject for both the idealist and the realist (e.g. the "hard problem of consciousness"). And, y...

An hour is "the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground stat...

That's your view as a direct realist but the idealist disagrees. The idealist will say that sense data occurs and that you incorrectly believe that th...

I don’t understand the problem. An atheist might say that it is incorrect to infer the existence of God or the afterlife or ghosts from some kind of p...

It’s your problem because it isn’t an argument.

You haven't given an argument. You've just said that you believe that rocks continue to exist when not being seen.

I'm not really interested in playing a game like that. If you have an actual argument in favour of realism or against idealism then I'd like to read i...

Not really. Just as the realist will say that our sense experiences are a response to stimulation by material things, and so evidence of external-worl...

So it isn't an argument. You're just describing what realists believe and stating your support of it. I'm not sure if this counts as an explanation: "...

This seems to be the only relevant thing you said to Terrapin: All you’re saying here is that you find realism more intuitive than idealism, but that’...

Well, yes, as it’s your first premise. But the idealist will say that the first premise and the second premise cannot both be true, so your hypothetic...

Even if you want to talk about the movement from A to B being continuous the half-way point between them is a discrete point that actually exists and ...

Then what term would you use to describe having to pass the 0.5m mark before the 1m mark, the 0.25m mark before the 0.5m mark, the 0.2m mark before th...

I’m not saying that. I’m saying that passing in order is a sequential series of events with no start and so cannot be started. My mention of counting ...

But this is just like saying that the single act of counting all members of S is the single act of counting the rationals from 0 to 1. It’s a nonsense...

I don’t know how to explain it any clearer than by saying that if each member has to be passed from smallest to largest and if there is no smallest th...

The problem is that there’s no smallest x after 0, so movement cannot start.

No, because the point I’m making has nothing to do with time.

Because if space is infinitely divisible then there exists such a subset and if motion is continuous then it must pass through each member sequentiall...

It’s not about determining the first step but about there (not) being one.

I'm not saying that motion is impossible because space is infinitely divisible. I'm saying that continuous motion is impossible because continuous mot...

It doesn't require counting or determining a first position. It requires there being a first position. But if motion is continuous then there isn't a ...

There isn't. Just as there's no first rational number after 0. This isn't just some epistemic problem where we're unable to calculate the first ration...

I'm not saying that. I'm saying that because there's no first 1/(2n)m position to pass through - a physical fact about space (assuming infinite divisi...

Which means that space is not infinitely divisible and/or motion is not continuous.

Why doesn't it work? If space really is infinitely divisible and if motion really is continuous then movement requires passing though each 1/(2n)m pos...

That there's a half-way point between any A and any B is, allegedly, a physical fact about space rather than just a constructed mathematical premise. ...

There's a difference between the act of halving a number and there being half a number. We can say that there is an infinite number of rationals betwe...

You don't need to accept that at all. It just follows from claiming that motion is continuous and so that to get from A to B you have to pass each 1/(...

Such a motion is impossible even if you don't need to count each distance. The logic behind passing each 1/(2n)m mark is the same logic behind countin...

The distances aren't just theoretical. When walking a metre the 0.5m mark is an actual point in space that has to be physically passed, as is the 0.25...

The thing that makes counting impossible is the thing that makes movement impossible, so it doesn't matter that motion doesn't depend on counting. Wha...

But you accept that it prevents counting from starting? What is the difference between counting each 1/(2n) number and moving through each 1/(2n)m mar...

I'm not saying you have to figure it out. I'm saying that, assuming the infinite divisibility of space and continuous motion, each 1/(2n)m mark must b...

I can't explain it in any simpler way. You might as well ask me what "there's no first number to count to" means in practice. It means precisely that.

Because the principle behind counting each 1/(2n) number is the same as passing each 1/(2n)m mark.