Some say that current science is evidence against traditional materialism (which differs from modern physicalism) and the naïve realist view of percep...
Changing someone's intuitions? Sounds like an oxymoron. Intuitions are what people have before any reasoned examination. And what sort of reasoning wo...
Perhaps a better example than my first: A painting of a cup is a painting of a cup, not a painting of paint and a canvas. But it is nonetheless the ca...
I've never understood this sort of objection. It seems to me like saying "when I punch a person I punch a person; I don't punch a striking fist". To p...
Is that what your argument rests on? An intuitive acceptance of your claim that we have a duty to not prevent pleasure and a duty to not impose pain? ...
I'd think that his commitment to his own consciousness takes priority. If he could be shown that consciousness really is qualia then he's more likely ...
You mean p-zombies? They might not be (metaphysically) impossible. If consciousness really is something above-and-beyond brain activity and behaviour ...
With your approach we could always reverse the consideration. You claim you can walk. Walking requires legs. Therefore you claim you have legs. Dennet...
It may be that Dennett is wrong in dismissing the sensibility of qualia, but because he isn't claiming that he doesn't have consciousness he isn't cla...
P-zombies lack consciousness. Only if consciousness is to be understood as qualia would a lack of qualia mean a lack of consciousness. But some, e.g. ...
I don't think (m)any philosophers claim to be p-zombies. What they claim is that the notion of qualia is not the proper way to understand consciousnes...
Yes, but that I agree (or believe) that Trump is the worst candidate for office is not that Trump is the worst candidate for office (or is it?). Becau...
So if I understand you correctly, you're saying that although the sentence itself is coherent and possibly true, it cannot be asserted with honesty? T...
So whenever we say "there is a cup" we mean "I think there is a cup"? Then how can we ever (correctly) claim that "there is a cup" is a factual statem...
So you're agreeing with the second suggestion in my opening post? "But it could also be argued that the statements "I agree that there is a cup" and "...
I'm really not sure how to understand that. If "I agree that there is a cup" and "there is a cup" mean different things then the negation of the latte...
It's not just me though. I want the whole society to be in a better economic situation. What I think is stupid is a willingness to put national pride ...
I don't know enough about economics to make a reasoned decision. I believe various financial institutions have said that staying in is better (althoug...
Yes it is. That one ought not X is that one is obligated to not X. And before we go 'round in circles arguing over definitions, I'll simply say that t...
The nihilist might say that there isn't a moral authority, or that such a thing is incoherent. The subjectivist might say that each person is a moral ...
If "X is immoral" just means "one ought not X" then there is no sense of morality that does not involve rule-following as obligation without rules is ...
It's issued by a moral authority rather than a legal authority. It's not clear to me what the distinction is. We're as free to break the law as we are...
The first premise is read as "that one is obligated to not X is that there is a rule against X". So, where the obligation is a moral obligation, "that...
If it's sound then the conclusion can't be false. And that isn't a consequence. I'm not saying that every obligation is a moral obligation. I'm saying...
Then let's add a fourth premise to the above argument (which you now seem to accept as sound): 1. That one ought not X is that X is against the rules ...
No, it's a single argument on its own: That one ought not X is that X is against the rules That X is against the rules is that some authority has comm...
As I said, I didn't bring up morality until point 6. But you questioned point 1. Consider the first three points as a standalone argument. Every oblig...
I'm not saying that it's an ethical question. I'm saying that the claim "one ought not X" is the same as the claim "X is against the rules". At the mo...
I didn't claim otherwise. I only asked if you could provide one. Are you saying that you don't have one? Could you give an example? I can't see how th...
It seems accurate to me. You ought not start a sentence with a lower case letter. It is against the rules to start a sentence with a lower case letter...
Your quote missed the other premise. It's: that one ought not X is that some authority has commanded that one not X That so-and-so is an authority and...
Comments