Philosophy Now Forum

Indirect realism has already beaten transcendental idalism maybe a century ago of course, so this isn't anything new. I just didn't know accurately enough what VA and Kant meant by transcendental idealism (and how VA misunderstood Kant), and VA didn't understand anything about anything and still do...

Okay. I can't remember how the indirect realism v transcendental idealism discussion developed - for which, apologies. I may have a look back and trace it. Indirect realism has already beaten transcendental idalism maybe a century ago of course, so this isn't anything new. I just didn't know accura...

Has this Wittgenstein guy ever said anything substantial, anything groundbreaking? It's a pretty bad sign when you start arguing against your former philosophy, if you don't get philosophy right the first time, chances are you won't get it right the second time either. Okay. There's no need to give...

How to sharpen up VA's argument? Premise: We humans have to perceive, know and describe reality in human ways. (Note: This sentence is a description of a feature of reality, or a state-of-affairs. And it has a truth-value.) Conclusion: Therefore, reality is nothing more than the ways we humans perc...

How to sharpen up VA's argument? Premise: We humans have to perceive, know and describe reality in human ways. (Note: This sentence is a description of a feature of reality, or a state-of-affairs. And it has a truth-value.) Conclusion: Therefore, reality is nothing more than the ways we humans perce...

P1 If X is morally wrong, then X is morally wrong.
P2 X is morally wrong.
C Therefore, X is morally wrong.

That's a slam-dunk.

Has this Wittgenstein guy ever said anything substantial, anything groundbreaking? It's a pretty bad sign when you start arguing against your former philosophy, if you don't get philosophy right the first time, chances are you won't get it right the second time either. Okay. There's no need to give...

If it's a false dichotomy, you should have no problem at all showing that it is. Explain, then, why a subjectivist has any justification to condemn or advocate somebody else's actions, with no appeal to moral objectivity. You have a go. I cannot make your argument for you. I see its falsity. If it ...

Peddling the same false dichotomy, the same counterfeit coin. Boring. If it's a false dichotomy, you should have no problem at all showing that it is. Explain, then, why a subjectivist has any justification to condemn or advocate somebody else's actions, with no appeal to moral objectivity. You hav...

You'd better include more data, I would say. First, you'd have to know that the right solution for God to adopt would be to prevent all evil/wickedness/immorality from happening, before it could happen. That is, you'd have to know that a world with no evil in it was, in every way, preferable to one...

To repeat. IC's theistic moral objectivism amounts to the following valid syllogism. (IC likes syllogisms.) P1 If my team's god says X is morally right/wrong, then (it's a fact that) X is morally right/wrong. P2 My team's god says X is morally right/wrong. C Therefore, (it's a fact that) X is morall...

If I have the power to prevent an immoral/wicked/evil act, and I don't prevent it, then I am immoral/wicked/evil. And, of course, moral objectivists agree. But IC's team believes its god has that power - but worships it as the source of all goodness. Moral conclusion? You'd better include more data...

You insist my argument is realist[P] when to me it is not. Therefrom you rely on your misunderstanding to condemn what you think is my argument [i.e. p-realist]. If that is not a strawman fallacy, then what it is. No, I'm not distorting your argument. I'm showing why it is, in fact, philosophically...

Just come across 'Filos O'Fickle Papers' at Amazon - and I find I agree with almost everything in it.

If I have the power to prevent an immoral/wicked/evil act, and I don't prevent it, then I am immoral/wicked/evil. And, of course, moral objectivists agree. But IC's team believes its god has that power - but worships it as the source of all goodness. Moral conclusion? Good job IC's team's god is an ...