Philosophy Now Forum

When Will I See You Again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUSYj5zq144

Words

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IasCZL072fQ

lucanor, you read my texts inprecisely. I guess it hasn't even crossed your mind that your texts are imprecise. It is getting tiresome to continue this. Very. I am sorry, I'm begging out. I stated my position often and consistently enough so that a five-year-old decorative globe made of lapis lazur...

This is what is called "doubt". One is not sure if it's one way or the other. Also synonym of "not holding as a statement of fact". You gave two synonyms for the meaning of "doubt" and they are contradictory. No, they are not and you must be dreaming if you think they are. You've just shown how dub...

Lucanor, if you want an answer to your question, read the words of the very post you answered. You can't ask questions on topics that have just been answered. You asked: "John Doe... will try to prove to another mind (Mary Jane, who's existence he does not hold as a statement of fact) that John Doe...

There are two things I did not claim, and they are mistakenly attributed to what I said. 1. "a solipsist (John Doe) that believes that his mind is the only thing that can be proven to exist" This is not true. There are three qualifiers without which this statement is not something I would say. The ...

-1- wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:25 am
You later redefined "doubt" as "not being certain" but I shan't accept that explanation, because it would bastardize the meaning...

What's the meaning, then?

Conde Lucanor: I must have misinterpreted the meaning of "doubt" as you meant it. Hence you are misinterpreting my statements. This I can't fault you for. Maybe I ought to have asked you first what you mean by "doubt". There are a number of misunderstandings still. Let me explain: "John Doe does no...

Almost right, but you made two mistaken conclusions: Bear in mind that I'm not concluding anything, I'm just trying to understand the implied premises of what you're saying. That's why my post ended with a question mark. 1. John Doe does not doubt that Mary Jane's mind exists. He just has no proof ...

To the mind, of course. And to things outside the mind which are capable of comprehension. The mind needs no proof of these things outside of itself; it is merely enough for the mind to know that it is available to those who may or may not be out there. So, what you're saying is that a solipsist (J...

Then you have the wrong definition of solipsism. Actually, i researched the definition of solipsism before I dared to venture out and state that definition. I found seven definitions, and six out of seven said solipsism is the idea that only the mind can be proven to exist. The key question is: pro...

You know what? You are right about this. I have no way of knowing whether you quoted him word for word. So why should I believe you did? If I have the text, or the voice recording, I can check that. But since i don't, it's your word against yours, that the transcription is word-for-word. I am not c...

Right there you're talking nonsense and going around the bushes with sophistry, avoiding the central issue. The quoted statements are separated, each one expressing complete ideas without any cut (that's word for word). A quote is ALWAYS an extract of a bigger work, in this case a lenghty lecture. T...

Since it has been proven with the help of the external references that you have a misconception of what solipsism stands for, I don't think I should bother to see your answers under that misconceived notion. Interesting to note that even without having the original source at hand, you assert that my...

Once again, you are missing what solipsism is. Nope. You're missing it. That's why I gave you external references, so that you learn what solipsism is usually believed to be. Since it proves you wrong, you just decided to ignore it and go along with your previous misconception. Direct quote? Direct...