if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 8002
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 7:29 am All Philosophers [as generally defined] would agree;
  • "All humans are mortal."
All Western Philosophers will agree with;
  • All humans are mortal.
    Socrates is human.
    Hence, Socrates is mortal.
The above doesn't even stand up to Methodism !

How do you know that P1 and P2 are true?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 6480
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:14 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 7:29 am All Philosophers [as generally defined] would agree;
  • "All humans are mortal."
All Western Philosophers will agree with;
  • All humans are mortal.
    Socrates is human.
    Hence, Socrates is mortal.
The above doesn't even stand up to Methodism !

How do you know that P1 and P2 are true?
I believe all philosophers [as generally defined] will agree with P1 in relation to the question in the OP.
Show me one philosopher [of some credibility] who had disagreed or will disagree with P1?

On a further discussion [not related to the OP],
There is no absolute certainty,
thus P1 cannot be absolutely certain for it is only concluded from known observations of the past, thus inferred via induction not deduction.
PeteJ
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:15 pm

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by PeteJ »

Skepdick wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 7:21 pm Implicit Question: Is metaphysics undecidable?
I have no idea what the question even means. Don't worry, we're on different planets. It happens sometimes.
Skepdick
Posts: 8002
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Skepdick »

PeteJ wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 10:01 am I have no idea what the question even means.
How is that even possible?!?

The meaning of the English question "Are metaphysical questions undecidable?" answered with a "Yes" is EXACTLY the same as the meaning of the English sentence "Metaphysical questions are undecidable."

In expressing the latter you have implicitly decided on the former.
PeteJ wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 10:01 am Don't worry, we're on different planets. It happens sometimes.
I am not the least bit worried. I am confused because your notion of "understanding" looks a lot like my notion of "not understanding".

On my planet it's impossible to understand any statement without first understanding the question behind it.
PeteJ
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:15 pm

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by PeteJ »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 10:11 am
PeteJ wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 10:01 am I have no idea what the question even means.
How is that even possible?!?
You asked 'Is metaphysics undecidable'?'

I don't know what this means. How can a word be undecidable? I'll happily answer the question if you make it clear.
The meaning of the English question "Are metaphysical questions undecidable?" answered with a "Yes" is EXACTLY the same as the meaning of the English sentence "Metaphysical questions are undecidable."

In expressing the latter you have implicitly decided on the former.
It seem we agree on this at least.
On my planet it's impossible to understand any statement without first understanding the question behind it.
On mine questions don't have statements behind them, they have assumptions.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 10681
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by henry quirk »

Advocate wrote: Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:56 pm
henry quirk wrote: Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:54 pmno
Where's your evidence for that? What do you mean by "no"?
no is the answer to your question

my evidence: this forum, for starters
Skepdick
Posts: 8002
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Skepdick »

PeteJ wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:58 pm You asked 'Is metaphysics undecidable'?'

I don't know what this means. How can a word be undecidable? I'll happily answer the question if you make it clear.
You have the memory-span of a gold fish.

Throughout the conversation you have been insisting that "Metaphysical problems/questions are undecidable", now suddenly all the context evaporated and "metaphysics" is just a word. Why the rapid deflationism?

I made the question clear: Are metaphysical problems undecidable?
PeteJ wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:58 pm It seem we agree on this at least.
So you do agree that you have decided on a metaphysical question?
While also insisting that metaphysical question is undecidable?
PeteJ wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:58 pm On mine questions don't have statements behind them, they have assumptions.
Obviously! The assumption behind EVERY question is that you understand its meaning - both holistically; as well as the meaning of the individual terms in relation to the question and the context it's being asked.

If you don't understand the meaning of your question then you have no idea what you are even asking.

So do you, or do you not understand the question: Are metaphysical problems undecidable?
PeteJ
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:15 pm

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by PeteJ »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 6:26 am You have the memory-span of a gold fish.

Throughout the conversation you have been insisting that "Metaphysical problems/questions are undecidable", now suddenly all the context evaporated and "metaphysics" is just a word. Why the rapid deflationism?
II see you care nothing for rigour and clarity and expect me to read minds.

I think you must admit I tried, but now let's forget this nonsense.
Skepdick
Posts: 8002
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Skepdick »

PeteJ wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:21 pm II see you care nothing for rigour and clarity and expect me to read minds.
I see you care nothing for charity.

Which part of: "Are metaphysical questions undecidable?" is unclear to you?

There's no mind reading required here. I am using your exact language. If your language is "unrigorous" that's entirely on you.
PeteJ wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:21 pm I think you must admit I tried, but now let's forget this nonsense.
Tried? No. You are trying. No, you are working overtime to take us further away from the point.

Are metaphysical questions undecidable?

To answer this question either way is to make a decision.

Metaphysical questions are not undecidable - we decide on them all the time. You are conflating undecidability with ineffability.
PeteJ
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:15 pm

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by PeteJ »

Skepdick wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:27 pm Metaphysical questions are not undecidable - we decide on them all the time. You are conflating undecidability with ineffability.
Oh man. You're making a prat of yourself with such enthusiasm. If you can prove what you say here you will win international fame and fortune.

I would suggest studying the issues before forming your opinions. This stuff is basic.

You might as well state that 2+2 does not equal 4.

I'm embarrassed to have spent any time on this.
Skepdick
Posts: 8002
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Skepdick »

PeteJ wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:57 pm Oh man. You're making a prat of yourself with such enthusiasm. If you can prove what you say here you will win international fame and fortune.
You are the living proof!

The question about the decidability of metaphysical questions is itself a metaphysical question.

You have decided a metaphysical question, while claiming that metaphysical questions are undecidable. Are you going to deny doing that?
PeteJ wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:57 pm I would suggest studying the issues before forming your opinions. This stuff is basic.
It is basic! So why is it that you don't understand what decisions and deciders are?
PeteJ wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:57 pm You might as well state that 2+2 does not equal 4.
Well, ACTUALLY.

It depends on what "+" means in your framework. And it depends on which notion of equality you have in mind.

But the most trivial counter-example to your objection is the Ternarry number system in which 2+2 = 11.
Last edited by Skepdick on Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Skepdick post_id=475520 time=1602703936 user_id=17350]
[quote=PeteJ post_id=475514 time=1602701826 user_id=11479]
Oh man. You're making a prat of yourself with such enthusiasm. If you can prove what you say here you will win international fame and fortune.
[/quote]
You are the living proof!

The question about the decidability of metaphysical questions is itself a metaphysical question.

You have [b]decided[/b] a metaphysical question, while claiming that metaphysical questions are undecidable. Are you going to deny doing that?

[quote=PeteJ post_id=475514 time=1602701826 user_id=11479]
I would suggest studying the issues before forming your opinions. This stuff is basic.
[/quote]
It is basic! So why is it that you don't understand what decisions and deciders are?

[quote=PeteJ post_id=475514 time=1602701826 user_id=11479]
You might as well state that 2+2 does not equal 4.
[/quote]
Well, ACTUALLY.

It depends on the number system you are using, and it depends on what "+" means in your framework.
[/quote]

I don't know what y'all are blathering on about. I can answer all metaphysical questions so any contention to the contrary is simple bunk.
Skepdick
Posts: 8002
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Skepdick »

Advocate wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:46 pm I don't know what y'all are blathering on about. I can answer all metaphysical questions so any contention to the contrary is simple bunk.
Obviously you can and you do answer metaphysical questions. Everybody does.

You can't tell me HOW you are doing it, but there is no denying THAT you are doing it.
Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Skepdick post_id=475525 time=1602704898 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=475524 time=1602704806 user_id=15238]
I don't know what y'all are blathering on about. I can answer all metaphysical questions so any contention to the contrary is simple bunk.
[/quote]
Obviously you can and you do answer metaphysical questions. Everybody does.

You can't tell me HOW you are doing it, but there is no denying THAT you are doing it.
[/quote]

An answer is best understood as a framework of understanding within which a solution (a bespoke plan of action) becomes apparent.
Skepdick
Posts: 8002
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: if there's anything that all philosopers can agree on

Post by Skepdick »

Advocate wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:52 pm An answer is best understood as a framework of understanding within which a solution (a bespoke plan of action) becomes apparent.
That's how greedy algorithms work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greedy_algorithm
Post Reply