Philosophy Now Forum

So far, yes, Londoner, most ethical concepts are vague. As ambiguous concepts are sharpened up they get ready to be part of science; as they become precise, and interrelated, it is not much of a stretch to say that a new science has come into existence. I would respectfully disagree that restrictio...

prof wrote: When the concepts are precise we are in the realm of science.

They are precise because they are restricted to that realm. When we stray into another realm, like ethics, they lose that precision.

The thing is that science does have a specific method for making inferences, whereas the rest of philosophy is sadly lacking in methods of inference. And without specific methods of inference, it becomes mere opinion. If you have picked a specific method then you will have first chosen to disregard...

He could just as likely be a calculating, rational terrorist. Accepting the assumption, the premise is effectively correct, but not literally correct. Terrorist genocide would end terrorism. Overwhelming unethical and immoral force upon terrorists would end terrorism.... The traditional reason for ...

You are confusing two meanings of the term "dimension". One has to do with measurement, the quantitative aspect of things, but the subject here is the qualitative aspect in the existence of those things, of their mere presence, their ontology. We could call it the domains of time and spac...

Back from holiday! Rome. Just coincidence. It's the other way around: beings have a past and a future. They are located in the space and time dimensions. You seem to acknowledge only the space dimension, a static universe where there are no events, no change, no movement. 'Dimensions' are the names ...

As you can see, you inevitably use time dimensions to describe properties of an object. You use the word "simultaneously", which conveys time and a relative position of the object in it. The being of an object is inevitably displayed in a sequence of time, otherwise things would be eterna...

You are missing the present now. Is it also a metaphor? But if the past and the future are only metaphors, that would apply then to all beings, who would not live in the past or the future, either. But objects known in the present have had previous states and will have future states, in other words...

Because none of those words describe locations, so nobody lives there. To talk of 'living in the past' or ' it is in the future ' are metaphors! In other words not even humans are restricted by time; same as god. Yes; I'm saying that the notion of time as if it was itself a thing, a railway line on...

What you say is logically incorrect. You are making an error of definition since living is defined by time, and so living is entails time. I do not think that living is defined by time. It might be measured using time, just the living object might be measured by weight, or height. If living was def...

Me: Surely God would not live in the past, present or future. And the logical support for that statement is? Because none of those words describe locations, so nobody lives there. To talk of 'living in the past' or ' it is in the future ' are metaphors! Me: God does not have that problem. He can kn...

No, that was not the argument. We are supposedly talking about an infinite being that lives simultaneously in the past, present and future, because it would not be restricted to time and space dimensions. If your god has such strict limitations, it is not all powerful and certainly not all knowing....

I think it would be better if we avoided saying we 'see the visualized triangle'. To visualize something is not to see it.

The environment is very influential in the use of profanity. After college I spent 7 years teaching in a Jr. HS and simply did not develop that aspect of my vocabulary. Then I worked in machine shops where every sentence had one or more curse words in it, and I don't believe the people talking like...

"So, when you say of the neurons that they do not fire in a triangular form, I think they do. " Londoner So you are saying that when you visualize a triangle you are seeing your neurons fire in a triangular form. I disagree. I'm saying that there is no 'triangular form', only thoughts of ...