Michael

No, all I'm saying is that aletheist's solution to the problem of counterfactuals doesn't work. He said that "if X then Y" is true if the laws of natu...

So a statement like "if I had opened the box at time t I would have found the cat to be dead" could be true even though the laws of nature do not dete...

So we have to abandon the principle of bivalence (in at least some occasions)? Some statements do not have exactly one truth value? We can't say eithe...

So given the counterfactual statements "if I had opened the box at time t I would have found the cat to be dead" and "if I had opened the box at time ...

My question about Schrödinger's cat was directed at aletheist's claim that counterfactual claims can be said to be true (or false) because the laws of...

You said it was verificationism. Now you're saying it's falsification? But even if it's falsification, how do you falsify the counterfactual "if X had...

It's not. The discussion is explicitly about counterfactuals. The exact example in the OP is "For example if I say 'If the Germans had won WW2' How is...

Surely counterfactuals are a problem for verificationism. How do you verify "if X had happened then Y would have happened"?

So verificationism?

No, that's not the same. The statement was "If I had opened the box at 3:00pm then I would have found the cat to be dead". The issue is that the laws ...

To explain this further, the OP raises a problem with the correspondence theory of truth. Statements are said to be true if they correspond to some ob...

Some counterfactual claim about Schrodinger's cat, for example. "If I had opened the box at 3:00pm then I would have found the cat to be dead". Then h...

It's an empirical fact that I have never flipped a coin and measured it to be both heads and tails.

I can't be in two different branches of a decohered wavefunction. I'm only ever in one.

Right, then a counterfactual quantum event rather than a future quantum event. How do you account for its truth, given that the laws of nature do not ...

But the statement we're considering is "the coin will land hands", not "the coin has a 0.5 chance of landing heads". If the former is true, what makes...

Hume's claim is that we don't see causation. We only see invariant correlation, and then infer causation – and that this inference isn't deduction.

Consider the statement "the particle will be at position p at time t". Presumably this statement is either true or false. According to aletheist (as I...

What about a statement about some future (or hypothetical) quantum event?

"At this point, an argument broke out between this reporter and Williamson as to whether inconsistency constitutes a red flag or whether being a red f...

What's the difference between a deflationary and a non-deflationary correspondence?

Poor guy.

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chasten...

So when we say that omnipotence (or kindness, say) is good we're just saying that omnipotence (or kindness) is consistent with God's nature? This does...

So you're not talking about the meaning/definition of "good"? Just about what things are good? In which case I haven't made a mistake; the mistake was...

But you said that we define "good" according to the nature of God. If it's God's nature to be omnipotent then we define "good" as "omnipotent". So wha...

So what is God? Well, for one he's omnipotent. Therefore we define "good" as "omnipotent"? Obviously that doesn't work.

That the theist thinks that murder is evil and that you define "evil" as being unjustifiable is not that the theist thinks that murder is unjustifiabl...

I'm not dismissing your definition. I'm saying that you can't simply refute the free will defence by choosing to define "evil" in such a way that thei...

You can't simply define a term in such a way that your opponent's claim is false by definition. This is why I accused you of equivocating (which bizar...

Then you don't have a reasoned argument against the free will defence. You're more than welcome to simply deny it, but then you're also more than welc...

Then to repeat: citation needed. You seem to simply be asserting that certain voluntary and harmful actions cannot be justified, and so the free will ...

The free will theodicist argues that the existence of free will justifies the existence of all harmful actions. If evil is defined in part as being un...

Then we're back to what I said before: even if we accept this definition as stipulated, the free will theodicist and utilitarian could simply argue th...

Then you haven't justified your claim that nothing can justify evil. You admit that your prior responses employed equivocation, and equivocation is a ...

The argument doesn't assume that there is a good reason. The argument concludes that there is a good reason. The argument doesn't need to explain what...

We don't need to know what the good reasons are for "there are good reasons" to follow from the premises. Just as we don't need to know what's in the ...

It's not that the concept (of an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God) is flawed (notwithstanding any omnipotence/omniscience paradox), but that...

The simple answer is that God has a good reason for creating things that choose to do evil, given that he is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent. T...

Yes, so unenlightened needs to defend his claim "Nothing can justify evil, no amount of good." His attempt at doing so – "True by definition. If it's ...

If evil is defined (in part) as being unjustified. If it isn't defined in this way then genocide could still be evil even if justified by the greater ...

I don't see how looking addresses the issue. Is justifiability a visual phenomenon? Or maybe you just meant this metaphorically, and justifiability (o...

Clearly this definition isn't agreed upon by everyone, given the free will defence and utilitarianism. But even if we accept this definition as stipul...

Citation needed.

"Challenging pervasive social norms and stigmas, it frames autism, ADHD/ADD, dyslexia, bipolarity and other neurotypes as a natural human variation ra...

Why would the word "disorder" stigmatise the issue? It's an apt description; disorders are disruptions in the ordinary function of things, and a menta...

"Non-Functional Item Displayed For Entertainment Purposes Only". You don't say.

That likely meant nothing to 99% of users. ;)

Well, he was asked if he'd rather fight 100 duck-sized horses or 1 horse-sized duck.

The error is to go from ¬?(A ? ¬B) to A ? ?B. A is "I know that you will turn left" and B is "You will turn left". Determinism requires ?B, but ?B isn...