Philosophy Now Forum

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 ...

So. IC's team's god supposedly created and creates everything, including humans. And IC's team's god knows everything that will happen. So IC's team's god knows that quite a few of the human beings it supposedly creates will supposedly end up roasting in hell for all eternity, maybe just for the 'si...

Perhaps here's one form of the fallacy behind some forms of anti-realism: Each of us constructs reality 'in the mind', based on sense data. Therefore, reality is nothing more than each person's mental construct based on sense data. If it is, then the empiricist skepticism - and ultimately solipsism...

Perhaps here's one form of the fallacy behind some forms of anti-realism: Each of us constructs reality 'in the mind', based on sense data. Therefore, reality is nothing more than each person's mental construct based on sense data. If it is, then the empiricist skepticism - and ultimately solipsism ...

Strawman. Re W's language game principle, there no element of 'play per se'. It is just the game merely emerged spontaneously via human interactions in the case as in PI and On Certainty. W use the example of builders [construction] with their specific terminology. Where games are used literally, t...

Morality is off topic to the original point. What you pointed out to PH is the existence of language games and intersubjectivity which is the basis of objectivity within a FSRC. It has to be a FSRC and nothing else. Once again, notice the contradiction. You agree that humans 'play' language games; ...

Off topic. I have argued elsewhere ... That is your problem. Denying morality has an emotional element is why everything you say about morality is shit Morality is off topic to the original point. What you pointed out to PH is the existence of language games and intersubjectivity which is the basis...

You don't answer my questions, so here they are again: If to construct a model of reality (an 'FSRC') is to construct reality, then of what is the model a model? And if all we can know about reality are the models we construct, how can we construct them in the first place? And how can we assess and...

Perhaps we all agree that correspondence theories of truth are incorrect. For example, there's no correspondence between the factual assertion 'water is H2O' and the feature of reality that it asserts. For a start, a name no more corresponds with what it names than an arrow corresponds with its tar...

Perhaps we all agree that correspondence theories of truth are incorrect. For example, there's no correspondence between the factual assertion 'water is H2O' and the feature of reality that it asserts. For a start, a name no more corresponds with what it names than an arrow corresponds with its targ...

Because it is 'human-based' deductively, whatever follows, i.e. realization of reality and cognition [knowledge] of reality cannot be absolute independent of the human conditions [as you are claiming]. Well, who'd have thunk it? Human 'realisation' (?) and knowledge of reality cannot be independent...

Just one little moral fact. One little moral feature of reality that is or was the case, regardless of opinion. If morality is objective, that shouldn't be hard. But we get nothing.

I never assumed nor said otherwise. To repeat, also, I have already agreed with and accepted your definition here. So, why are you repeating what you are here? Did you forget, did you not comprehend, or has something else occured here? Also, let us not forget that I have already pointed out that th...

A few hundred years ago it was an objective fact that water was one of the only four elements in the universe. I am pretty sure that in a thousands years from now "water = H2O" is going to look equally ridiculous. "Water = H2O Fulfills all the current scientific norms and by agreemen...