Michael

I'm not saying you can't. I'm saying that it doesn't then follow that being a planet is reducible to these consistent characteristics. These consisten...

My view is that identity might be a linguistic/conceptual imposition, and not something that is to be simply reducible to having certain material char...

Given that it being true or false leads to a contradiction it must be that it is wrong to assume its truth or falsity. That's how a proof by contradic...

The complication lies in the assumption that the sentence must be truth-apt. But given that it being true or it being false would lead to a contradict...

I wonder if perhaps this means that murder being immoral isn't something you understand but something you feel.

By counting.

No, because we have a means to test the truth of the claim. Where did I claim that? I didn't make such an argument.

I think that's the key point. Unless you can explain what sort of thing would verify or falsify a moral claim such as "X is immoral" then the very not...

The question isn't odd, but there being objective moral facts might be odd, depending on what moral facts actually are.

I could always just edit in a (N) below each of your posts?

Then you are saying that "the plant intends to produce seed" just means that there is a chance that the plant will produce seed. So this use of the wo...

I don't see how this explains the difference between "the plant intends to produce seed" and "the plant will produce seed". Are you saying that the fo...

The question, though, is whether or not it is correct now to say that Pluto was a planet. If it was a planet then being a planet cannot be reduced to ...

If we used the word "planet" to refer to stoves then the word "planet" would mean "an apparatus for cooking or heating that operates by burning fuel o...

You've misunderstood. If Pluto isn't a planet and if being a planet can be reduced to having certain material characteristics and if the material char...

I look at it like this: Why is "triangles are three-sided shapes" true? Because "triangle" and "three-sided shape" mean the same thing. Why do "triang...

That doesn't really address the issue though. The issue is that if Pluto isn't a planet then either it was never a planet or being a planet cannot be ...

I didn't mean identity in that sense. I meant in the sense of being of a certain kind.

How can the future effect a plant's present course (or anything, for that matter)? You're arguing for retrocausality (not that I know how such a thing...

I look at it from a Wittgensteinian perspective. Meaning is use. What it means to be a game depends on how we use the word "game". What it means to be...

But the identity of planethood changed. So one thing that had the identity of being a planet no longer has the identity of being a planet.

Sure, and which properties they denote depends on how we use the noun. If we use the noun "planet" to refer to stoves then the noun "planet" would den...

From here: 1. Consider or think of in a specified way So you're saying that plants see, give heed to, or look upon the future? Yes, and consciousness ...

What I'm suggesting is that a thing's identity is not (directly) determined by its pre-linguistic properties but by its linguistic categorisation. A t...

Most philosophy reduces to this sort of thing in the end. ;) Edit: You referring to an old topic on horses?

And according to my idiolect, Pluto was a planet and now isn't. I've explained it quite clearly: a) Pluto was a planet, b) Pluto isn't a planet, c) Th...

I've repeatedly told you that I'm not claiming that we can turn a stove into a celestial body by naming it a planet. So I don't know why you keep brin...

I'm saying that if we use the word "planet" to refer to stoves then the meaning of the word "planet" would be such that "stoves are planets" would be ...

As I said in my previous post, I'm not saying that a stove can become a celestial body moving in an elliptical orbit round a star if everyone uses the...

I agree. But the question is; is to be a planet to have this property? If to be a planet is to have this property, and if Pluto has never had this pro...

Whether or not calling something a planet makes it so is the very question I'm asking (so obviously to address it you can't simply beg the question an...

So the question is; what is criterion X, and has Pluto ever met it? If criterion X is some set of material characteristics, and if Pluto has never had...

That depends on what it means to be a planet. If to be a planet is to have certain material characteristics then the claim that naming Pluto a planet ...

I'm not saying that they don't provide for the future. I'm saying that they have no regard for the future. To have regard for something is to think of...

"Purpose" is defined as "the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists". The reason in this context is to be underst...

I'm not assuming this. It simply follows from the common definition of "intention"/"purpose"/"design". You're misusing these words. Again you're offer...

A designer is someone who makes conscious decisions to achieve some desired end. So, again, you're misusing words (or arguing for some sort of intelli...

Huh. Using a # creates a search link. #Awesome.

I don't see how you get from "X successfully achieves Y" to "A intentionally uses X to achieve Y". I use the word in this restricted sense because tha...

Yeah, which is a very unconventional, and so confusing, use of the word "intention" (or "purpose").

No, gotta strikethrough it all and add in corrective red text "I'm a moron".

I know that @"Benkei" won't download the Philosophy of Religion forum. ;) @ Benkei.

Yes, I think that photosynthesis is not a purposeful act. A purposeful act is an act done by conscious determination. I read your post, and nowhere do...

Plants don't act purposefully, they act reactively. Animals act purposefully to the extent that they have consciousness (although a determinist or com...

Living things have intentions (assuming some level of consciousness), but they don't have the power to intentionally alter their genetic code (the eme...

There seems to be some equivocation going on here, as evidenced by Metaphysician Undiscovered's definition of "chance" as "the absence of design or di...

A thing's identity is, for example, being a planet. What sort of conditions must be satisfied for a thing to be a planet? On the one hand we might wan...

That doesn't really answer the question. Is there a difference between being a planet and being called a planet? If so, what is required for a thing t...

So a thing's identity as an X is dependent on what we say of it? A thing is a planet only if we talk about it as such? A thing is a cup only if we tal...

This is just nonsense. Treating the non-existence of a thing as a thing that exists? If this is the sort of thing that you're resorting to then there'...