Philosophy Now Forum

What about the scientific FSK makes it reliable? What would be the near equivalent in a moral FSK? Some would say there's no difference between science and morality; so what makes it 'reliable' is the results. So a second characterization of pragmatism might go like this: there is no epistemologica...

The principle is whatever the fact, it must always be conditioned to a specific FSK. You are using the word fact in the context of a particular FSK. As far as I can tell the meaning of fact within that FSK is something like 'an expression of a belief about some feature of our experience'; perhaps y...

When somebody asks you to demonstrate truth it's because they don't think it's true. That's one way of looking at it. Who said murder is objectively wrong? You did. You said it's true that murder is wrong. Objectively true. Subjectively true. Same difference. Differently the same. That's in the con...

truth is the property of all true things. Yes those are my words. Here are your words. And I will answer it openly once you have demonstrated that it is in fact true. So it follows from your words that you don't think it's true that this color is red. You seem very confused. Whatever logic you have...

So you don't think this color is red? What do you think it is? It's red because it's red. So this color is red but it's not true that it's red? You sound very fucking confused. truth is the property of all true things. It's wrong because it's wrong. So murder is wrong but it's not true that it's wr...

So you don't think this color is red? What do you think it is? It's red because it's red. So it's true because it's true. Fine by me. So.. do you think it's true that murder is wrong? It's wrong because it's wrong. It may seem like that to you, but to me it wouldn't be utility if it were context in...

I am simply asking an open ended question: What makes it true that this color is red? And I will answer it openly once you have demonstrated that it is in fact true. You are free to answer with a truth-theory that isn't the correspondence theory. Or if you want to agree to my theory - just the same...

Aside from the fact that correspondence is incoherent until you tell me how you've determined whether "red "or "blue" better corresponds to this color , Peter Holmes himself. claims he rejects correspondence. Correspondence or representationalist theories of truth are mistakes. ...

It's potayto/potahto. Is that THE way "we" use words? We? No idea, I just thought it would be a laugh to see if you rose to the bait. If we accept your premise (how do we know it's true?) You already have Yes, I know I already have. Which is why I have already dismissed Peter "Dumb C...

Language does NOT an cannot express anything about an "external" reality. Of course it can. We just can't know when it does. Potato/potaoh. It's potayto/potahto. If we accept your premise (how do we know it's true?) You already have: The problem of underdetermination just means that there...

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 15, 2023 3:47 pmLanguage does NOT an cannot express anything about an "external" reality.

Of course it can. We just can't know when it does.

You know you can do multi-variate optimisation, right? Maximise for everything "good". Minimise for everything "bad". In so far as you are pedling a bunch of normatives (and unstated) desideratum on how philosophy should and shouldn't be conducted you are in the exact same boat....

Can you tell me the difference between explaining ...and presenting an argument? Sure. One works forward. One works backwards. Presenting arguments is a philosophical ritual. You start with "true premises" and deduce conclusions. You follow the rules. You avoid logical fallacies and all o...

So you keep presenting arguments for why presenting arguments is a dumb sport. I am at a loss for words on how else to express to you the fact that I don't engage in the activity of "presenting arguments'; or the sport of "arguing", but I guess Bertrand Russel was right... A stupid m...

Given that you won't follow an argument even if you could, I won't waste my time explaining why you are the dumb fuck. Given that I have to keep explaining to you why arguing is a dumb sport with made up rules there's no need for having to also explain why you are the dumbest fuck. So you keep pres...