Philosophy Now Forum

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:35 pm Morality is what governs how we use tools and what we use them for.

A governing body sounds like a useful idea...

I imagine that's why theists have Gods; and societies have Governments.

Either way - higher authorities.

What is meant by "conceptual tool"? What is a "conceptual tool"? Are some things not "conceptual tools" or are all things conceptual tools? Not sure what's unclear here. Tools help you get stuff done. Ideas/concepts help you get stuff done. Thinking helps you get stuff...

What is meant by "conceptual tool"? What is a "conceptual tool"? Are some things not "conceptual tools" or are all things conceptual tools? Not sure what's unclear here. Tools help you get stuff done. Ideas/concepts help you get stuff done. Thinking helps you get stuff...

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2024 2:09 pm Are conceptual tools conceptual tools?

Are questions?

What would science have to do in order for you to be open to even the possibility of evolution? I am entirely open to evolution as conceptual tool. Just as I am open to irreducible complexity as a conceptual tool. So we agree that God is a conceptual tool. So we agree that reality is a conceptual t...

This is, of course, a different issue from the epistemological challenge to individual objectivists: can they demonstrate that their morality is the correct one. Everybody can demonstrate that their morality is the correct one. Sanctimony is the status quo. If morality is not objective - you can't ...

Physical things aren't objective or subjective. To repeat: what we call objectivity is reliance on facts, rather than opinions. Are you relying on facts or opinions when you say "Physical things aren't objective or subjective" ? Any objects (e.g an apple) is a "physical things. So ac...

Every thing that existed before humans evolved - for billions of years - obviously existed [by itself] regardless of humans. So this question is fantastically stupid. And the claim that, had humans not evolved, nothing would exist [by itself] - is mind-bogglingly absurd. Idiots like Peter "Dum...

There's nothing paradoxical or profound about it. It's just a misuse of language - a meaningless/useless string of scribbles. Just because you can arbitrarily arrange scribbles in a certain way that follows some arbitrary rules, does not mean that those scribbles refer to, or represent, anything us...

I see topics that might actually be interesting. Then I see it's rorydop who posts them.

And my enthusiasm dies.

This is to mistake what we know and therefore say about reality for reality itself. Water was, is and will be what we happen to call H2O, regardless of its being known and described. What is "it" that we happen to call H2O? What is "it" that we happen to call water? What is &quo...

What would science have to do in order for you to be open to even the possibility of evolution? I am entirely open to evolution as conceptual tool. Just as I am open to irreducible complexity as a conceptual tool. Those are just thinking hats for attacking practical problems. They are complementary...

Because health and life are at stake, to be assured it is real milk, people will ask for "proofs" [certification from a scientific lab] to confirm what is sold is pure milk and not adulterated milk and not some kind of white powder or liquid. Uhuh. And how would consumers ensure that the ...

Because health and life are at stake, to be assured it is real milk, people will ask for "proofs" [certification from a scientific lab] to confirm what is sold is pure milk and not adulterated milk and not some kind of white powder or liquid. Uhuh. And how would consumers ensure that the ...

Generally when the term 'prove' is associated with science, it mean 'justification' via the scientific method to convince whatever is scientifically-real. Justification is not in the job description either. There is a real difference between a 'real' apple and a 'fake' apple that is made of plastic...