A moral claim is not gauged by generalized criteria. Our lives have specific histories of judgments and interests and what matters, but the difference...
A conclusion from an argument deemed to be valid is one sense of truth, as a statement that is judgeed to be true or false. Some truth is not at the e...
I take dialectic to be a process of arriving at a sense of truth by logical argument. It implies that we have come to a conclusion that all people are...
It is not my claim, as in my thought or my statement (that is not the structure, the grammar). I accept its claim on me. It is my willingness to be re...
And my point is that science, as with the projection of reality, wants knowledge, but only "insofar as we are composed of that which adheres to natura...
@"Banno" @"180 Proof" @"Cidat" I probably can’t paint a picture with enough depth to instill the grip of skeptical doubt, but I do claim that it is no...
I appreciate your asking questions; skepticism is of course a long story (and I won't tell it right), but with Plato and Descartes, etc. radical skept...
Yes, I am saying the fear of the conclusions of the radical skeptic creates the need to answer him with a particular kind of solution, ignoring the or...
Tell that to Descartes. We imagine disaster though we have ordinary ways to mitigate it: excuses, apologies, etc. And we do not succumb, we react, cre...
Our compulsion for certainty is from our fear of the failure of our ordinary means of judgment, and so we strip away any context, abstracting to "real...
That my experience (what I saw, touched, tasted) can be an illusion, that I can be mistaken in my memory, my assumptions, makes it seem as if even the...
Wittgenstein will say we are compelled (to strip our world of any measure and replace it with a requirement for certainty). We may hope that a moral d...
You can take out "the reality" and, if you take out "surely" (certainly), then you can even take out "(for us)". We may turn out (afterwards) to be mi...
Not sure what "this" is (gonna assume everything I said, which seems like an oversimplification may be coming), but no, I am talking about everything....
I understand you want to avoid "quasi-platonic 'transcendental deduction' " but that is not to dismiss what "a priori" is, but only what you think are...
I didn't differentiate, because it doesn't matter. Rational or not, it is ascription of a "quality" to the world that starts the slippery slope. "Rati...
I'm not suggesting an emperical investigation. Instead of projecting (the "essence") into a thing, subject ahead of time to certainty, we are investig...
I guess what I said might be entirely inscrutable in not explicitly explaining that I took you to be saying that "a priori" was a function of the brai...
I'm pretty sure when I post, it just flies into the ether (it feels unreal). Again, the abstraction of reality into a quality was caused by the desire...
I emailed support and they said" I don't think the Share arrow at the bottom of a edited and saved document does us any good, but it sounds like it do...
Thanks, I've edited it a few times (and probably will again). I'm not sure how that works, but I think if you come at it from a link, you get the old ...
@"Banno"@"James Riley" For philosophy, reality is an abstract quality, such as appearance or essence (though not of an object, but the whole world). T...
As I said, I draw it out in more detail in the OP I titled "Bedrock Rules" (for lack of a catchier headline). Luke and I sidetrack into meaning and in...
I addressed this in the post to Luke (and many other posts in my OP on Cavell and Rules), but my claim is that the concept of "intention" is discussed...
Not that I want to get lost in that jungle, but we say you and I have the same sensation/experience to the extent we express it and agree we do. "I ha...
I would agree that we do not invent what is common amongst us, but I would not take "meaning" out of the internal and simply place it externally. Look...
You had said believe "in". I'll take it that was a mistake. If you want to choose to discuss the sense of "believing" as in accepting, that's fine, bu...
I'm not sure if you want to restrict the discussion either to only include certain people under "we", or to just the topic of belief as opinion that i...
Because you are the person who said it (as in, not me). You didn’t keep it to yourself. The identity of the expression of pain is that it is yours, in...
Modern philosophy has an understanding of our ownership of our expressions. That once you say or do something at a time and place, you are the one who...
I was attributing meaning (afterwards), not guessing at a "meaning" caused by you--I could have said "here in the sense of clear and precise". It is a...
If we do not draw out the options and the implications of what, say, a "process" is, it's possibilities, we do not understand what we are getting ours...
Saying something particular is not caused by my "intention" (or the particularity of a rule) so a particular "meaning" is not transferred from me to y...
No offense, it's just not a straight question; it asks for a straight answer. Logically (technically, definitionally) this is a loaded question becaus...
The OP is well-stated, thorough. Wittgenstein says that "Essence is expressed by grammar." PI #371 which is fairly cryptic apart from the history of K...
It's a trick question, or loaded. You can't say no, because it begs the question: the body doesn't have anything to do with thinking? (preposterous!) ...
I have to say yes, but I offer you to see for yourself that the answer is no. Yes, the brain is active, but that is not the "place" or cause of thinki...
I re-wrote this in the Private Language Argument thread, and what I remembered is that, grammatically, we do not "know" or "doubt" or own experiences ...
3) That a word can be defined (which we do call: its "meaning") does not reflect the way language works, e.g., a sentence cannot be defined. Meaning i...
@"Hanover" @"Janus" The first problem with the private language "argument" is that it (and the whole of PI for that matter) is seen as only true/false...
Not to dismiss your concerns, but what makes us believe that we have that conversation any differently with ourselves than we would with someone else?...
To radically simplify: If I understand ED, there is a distinction between the physical and the non-physical, and that the physical (body activity) has...
Neuroscience pictures the concept of intention (and the entirety of humans) as a physical phenomenon, an empirical occurrence, which comes from the be...
Justification; it's two senses of justification. One is authority, the other sense is a justification that props up my opinion so it doesn't matter th...
Cavell expounds Wittgenstein's description of continuing a concept into a new context. Since our concepts aren't complete, predetermined, universal, e...
This is a classic example of how the desire for certainty forces a picture on us that we then try to intellectually solve. It starts out okay by break...
@"mmw"@"tim wood" @"Welkin Rogue" How did this thread get Kant-jacked? Cavell does reference a few of Kant's ideas. He points out that Wittgenstein's ...
It's what I studied but no one takes him seriously, especially as an analytical philosopher. I would say commitments is the wrong word, as if they are...
Our expressions, as in "I know he is in pain" or "Did you intend to shot your neighbor's donkey?" for the benefit of making explicit the different imp...
Comments