You are using "we" normatively.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 5:29 pm There's no justification necessary. It's just a matter of whether we're talking about one thing or another.
When did anybody else appoint you to speak on their behalf?
You are using "we" normatively.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 5:29 pm There's no justification necessary. It's just a matter of whether we're talking about one thing or another.
No, I'm not. I'm using it descriptively. There's zero implication that you should be doing what other people are doing.Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 5:29 pmYou are using "we" normatively.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 5:29 pm There's no justification necessary. It's just a matter of whether we're talking about one thing or another.
It's simply possible to be aware of statistical commonalities.When did anybody else appoint you to speak on their behalf?
Then why are you framing the topic the way other people are framing it?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:01 pm No, I'm not. I'm using it descriptively. There's zero implication that you should be doing what other people are doing.
Awareness is one thing. Practicing the commonality yourself - that's agreement.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:01 pm It's simply possible to be aware of statistical commonalities.
Because it's an interesting topic in my opinion.Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:02 pmThen why are you framing the topic the way other people are framing it?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:01 pm No, I'm not. I'm using it descriptively. There's zero implication that you should be doing what other people are doing.
Agreement has nothing to do with normatives. Normatives are prescriptions.Awareness is one thing. Practicing the commonality yourself - that's agreement.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:01 pm It's simply possible to be aware of statistical commonalities.
You've worked your ass off to prescribe to me how to interpret/understand the is-ought gap.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:04 pm Agreement has nothing to do with normatives. Normatives are prescriptions.
It's not a prescription.Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:06 pmYou've worked your ass off to prescribe to me how to interpret/understand the is-ought gap.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:04 pm Agreement has nothing to do with normatives. Normatives are prescriptions.
Then why does it upset you that I refuse to learn/accept/understand the social norm you are shoving down my throat?
I see.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:12 pm It doesn't. You're giving yourself way too much credit.
It's not a defense of it. It's just a fact that it's what most philosophers are talking about, it's an issue with people on both sides of a dispute, and I find it interesting.Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:16 pmI see.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:12 pm It doesn't. You're giving yourself way too much credit.
So of all possible conceptions of the is-ought gap, why do you defend this particular one?
Seeming as you don't think it's normative.
OK, but why that particular interpretation?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:18 pm It's not a defense of it. It's just a fact that it's what most philosophers are talking about, it's an issue with people on both sides of a dispute, and I find it interesting.
It's not another topic.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:18 pm We can talk about another topic instead but it's another topic.
It was just an issue that came up historically and it was put in those terms. Lots of other people continued to talk about it in those terms.Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:19 pmOK, but why that particular interpretation?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:18 pm It's not a defense of it. It's just a fact that it's what most philosophers are talking about, it's an issue with people on both sides of a dispute, and I find it interesting.
Yeah, it is. We wouldn't be talking about the same issue. Using the same words for a different issue doesn't make it the same topic.It's not another topic.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:18 pm We can talk about another topic instead but it's another topic.
Well, you'd first have to justify what makes it "the same issue"...Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:27 pm Yeah, it is. We wouldn't be talking about the same issue. Using the same words for a different issue doesn't make it the same topic.
Then why are you arguing it would be the same issue?Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:30 pmWell, you'd first have to justify what makes it "the same issue"...Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:27 pm Yeah, it is. We wouldn't be talking about the same issue. Using the same words for a different issue doesn't make it the same topic.
Seeming as the discussions are occurring at different spatio-temporal locations.
I was giving you rope to hand yourself with.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 6:30 pm Then why are you arguing it would be the same issue?