What could make morality objective?

[RCSaunders]

What and where is a concept?

I have no idea if the symbols, "what," "where," and, "concept," signify anything to you. Do they? What do they signify and where do they do that signifying?

Any non-equivocal answers welcome.

[Peter Holmes]

What and where is a concept?

I have no idea if the symbols, "what," "where," and, "concept," signify anything to you. Do they? What do they signify and where do they do that signifying?

Any non-equivocal answers welcome.

Back at you. What concepts do the words 'what', 'where' and 'concept' signify or represent? And what and where are those concepts, and in what way do they exist? Does the concept signified by the word 'concept' exist in the way that word 'concept' exists? Please explain without equivocation.

I know how to use interrogative pronouns to form questions, of course.

What concept does the word 'hello' represent?

In what way is defining (describing) the concept of a tricycle different from defining (describing) a tricycle?

If we explain the grammatical use of the article 'a', have we therefore described a concept?

Metaphysical hogwash.

[Sculptor]

So, a concept is an emergent generalisation made in the mind by means of a conceptualisation process in the brain represented by a neural algorithm analogous to a computer-generated image processed from empirical data. And an idea is also a mental representation (produced by an idealisation process?), but not processed from empirical data.

So concepts and ideas are in the mind, which is in the brain. Sorted. No mysticism there.

Then how come we can explain all this "mysticism" to computers?

I love to dip into my foes.
This is the funniest thing I've read so far today.
Do you really think you can explain anything to a computer?
Teehee!!

[Skepdick]

I love to dip into my foes.
This is the funniest thing I've read so far today.
Do you really think you can explain anything to a computer?
Teehee!!

To pull a Bill Clinton on you: It depends on what the meaning of the word "anything" is.

I don't think we can explain "anything" to a computer. I know we can.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car

Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer. Art is everything else we do. --Donald Knuth

And now you will probably scramble and move the goalposts for necessity and sufficiency on what the words "explain" means.

[Peter Holmes]

So when we programme a machine to do something, that's explaining to the machine how to do it. Oh-kay.

[Skepdick]

So when we programme a machine to do something, that's explaining to the machine how to do it. Oh-kay.

Why the sarcasm?

Is the self-driving car not driving itself?

We explained to a computer how to drive a car. Did we not?

Or do you have some other conception of what an "explanation" is?

[uwot]

The thing is you are demonstrably a liar and a cheat who will rip the heart out of the truth until it says what you want it to.

That is EXACTLY how communication works! That's exactly how "being heard" works! I make words mean exactly what I want them to mean. It's a feature, not a bug.

Fair enough Skepdick, let's do it your way:

...I am...a...t...w...at.

[Skepdick]

Fair enough Skepdick, let's do it your way:

...I am...a...t...w...at.

I guess we have to start with reading comprehension with you.

I am not a twat.I am a dick. Skepdick. You are free to use whatever pejorative you want, but none of that has any bearing on what I am actually asking from you.

You are working overtime to keep the spotlight away from yourself.
In what language do you want me to tell you that I'll dismiss everything you say until you answer my question?

A. This is red.
B. This is red.

HOW did you decide which one is "true"?

Literally! Tell me what went into your decision-making process!

And if you haven't decided, say that!

[Belinda]

What I mean by freedom is the best freedom from all or each of those as got by means of reason powered by passion. Reason powered by passion is the proper default psyche of all human beings.

Indeed. The human condition is shared in human experience.

Failure of passion might be addressed by medical attention to thyroxine deficiency and suchlike but is often unfortunately a chronic physical condition and can be caused by some varieties of irreversible physical or mental injury.

I have spent much time wondering what cultivates curiosity. "That's just how I am wired" is not quite the answer I want.

I don't think it's a problem fixable with a pill.

For instance if it were possible to meet Socrates at the hour of his death it would be a reasonable claim in him passion and reason each was active and well balanced together.

Socrates and I have a difference of opinion here. Falling on swords is not my idea of victory - there's no virtue in dying for a cause.

Or in the words of Patton: No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his.

Socrates had a failure of passion.

Failure of reason is best addressed by provision of the best possible conditions for learning. The best possible conditions for learning imply overlap between therapy and education.

How do you educate an incurious mind?

Is there any adult in good health and sharpened reasoning ability who would contend

"Free from authoritarian oppression.
Free from dystopian apathy.
Free from over-zealous and unreasonable passion."

are not freedoms to be wished and aimed for?

They absolutely are, but that is the pinnacle and problem of society. What do we do when our freedoms clash?

The pen is mightier than the sword in a society ruled by laws.
On a battlefield - not so much.

Or the old cliche: I'd rather be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener in a war.

What cultivates curiosity is partly good enough physical health . For instance teachers want their students to be well slept, breakfasted, and have had space and privacy to do their homework, have had their eyes and hearing tested and sorted if necessary.Again, Doctors well know inactive thyroids can and do mimic depression.
In addition to hygienic measures which are simple enough to sort the student who has to have her curiosity stimulated and tended needs her native curiosity to be stimulated and not inhibited typically by religious or political dogmas, and to be permitted as much liberty as is safe for her. After that she needs to be presented with material that intrigues her.

If the adolescent or adult mind is already damaged / incurious, as far as I know the only recourse for teachers is to enliven it by means of stories or other art that tap into pleasure or sympathy. Maybe maths too you should know.

Socrates did not take the hemlock for ignoble motives like fatherland and its gods. He took it because he would not trade honesty for inauthenticity. The world still needs gadflies perhaps more than ever. Victory is spiritual as well as material. Victory has been variously defined during the human past. There was a time and place when fighting men cared not for geography and territorial gains but fought only to steal moveable goods like cattle and maintaining the power, frequently horse power, to do so. But we , now, need gadflies as never before. The battle right now is for minds not territory or goods.

When our freedoms clash what we do depends on how brave and strong we are.Some people prefer to profit from wars and other disasters and I include some politicans in office right now. But we aren't talking about parasites are we? Your and General Patten's claims about warfare are true of warfare however warfare is not the best way to stimulate curiosity.

[RCSaunders]

If we explain the grammatical use of the article 'a', have we therefore described a concept?

Metaphysical hogwash.

Alright. It's difficult to discuss epistemology with someone who confuses it with metaphysics. Interesting, though.

[Sculptor]

I love to dip into my foes.
This is the funniest thing I've read so far today.
Do you really think you can explain anything to a computer?
Teehee!!

To pull a Bill Clinton on you: It depends on what the meaning of the word "anything" is.

I don't think we can explain "anything" to a computer. I know we can.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car

Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer. Art is everything else we do. --Donald Knuth

And now you will probably scramble and move the goalposts for necessity and sufficiency on what the words "explain" means.

Not even a self driving car can be explained to.
This is a laughable abuse of language.
Computers understand nothing.

[Peter Holmes]

If we explain the grammatical use of the article 'a', have we therefore described a concept?

Metaphysical hogwash.

Alright. It's difficult to discuss epistemology with someone who confuses it with metaphysics. Interesting, though.

Why does knowing something is the case have anything to do with concepts, any more than it has anything to do with propositions?

I think you've bought into the myth of abstract things, which is a metaphysical delusion.

[Skepdick]

Computers understand nothing.

Maybe you don't. Other computers understand some things.

[Sculptor]

Computers understand nothing.

Maybe you don't. Other computers understand some things.

You are simply wrong.
You are clueless about what computers do.
You might as well say that a hammer understands.

[Skepdick]

Y̶o̶u̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ I am simply wrong.
Y̶o̶u̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ I am clueless about what computers do.
Y̶o̶u̶ ̶I might as well say that a hammer understands.

There, fixed it for you.

A hammer is not a computer.
A computer can make choices - a hammer can't.