Philosophy Now Forum

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Apr 09, 2023 7:16 am
Whenever I mentioned ‘FSK’ in my posts,

Whenever didn't you mention them?

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 9:49 am So, back to this criticism

You are the one who is claiming H2O existed prior to its emergence from the scientific FSK independent of any entanglement with the human conditions.
Thus the onus of proof [justification] is on you.

The problem isn't that he says h2o existed, the real problem is he didn't say "fsk yada yada" before he said h2o existed prior. Just making sure I got that right.

I am not too sure of your point, so I am just throwing out points and hopefully there is a hit with your question.
Note my explanation above.

The real problem is PH as a philosophical realist claimed;
'water is H20' existed even before there were humans, period!
'water is H20' existed even before there were the chemistry-FSK, period!
The above is unqualified to any FSK.

It would be realistic [anti-philosophical realism] if PH or anyone state;
water [linguistic FSK] is H20 [science-chemistry FSK] in the general sense.

in another sense,
water [linguistic FSK] is NOT H20 [science-chemistry FSK].
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39844
when isotopes are taken into consideration.

Thus, as long as one qualify one's statement of claim to a specific FSK, that would be valid, the question of its soundness is subject to the credibility and reliability tests.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 10:50 am
water [linguistic FSK] is NOT H20 [science-chemistry FSK].
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39844
when isotopes are taken into consideration.

When I am boiling water, in accordance with the making a cup of tea FSK, I don't worry about the isotopes.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 12:09 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 10:50 am
water [linguistic FSK] is NOT H20 [science-chemistry FSK].
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39844
when isotopes are taken into consideration.

When I am boiling water, in accordance with the making a cup of tea FSK, I don't worry about the isotopes.

You're practically Muslim.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 1:04 pm You're practically Muslim.

I'm sure I am when looked at within a certain FSK.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 10:50 am [linguistic FSK]

The snake has its arse entirely up inside its head now.
A "Linguistic FSK" is the dumbest bullshit idea he's had yet.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 1:36 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 10:50 am [linguistic FSK]

The snake has its arse entirely up inside its head now.
A "Linguistic FSK" is the dumbest bullshit idea he's had yet.

Meanwhile in AI research LLMs (that stands for Large Language Models btw) are exhibiting emergent behaviors like developing theories of mind, causal world models and doing things that are not present in the training data.

Every time you insinuate somebody has their head up their ass, it’s always a good idea to consider yourself the prime candidate.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 2:42 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 1:36 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 10:50 am [linguistic FSK]

The snake has its arse entirely up inside its head now.
A "Linguistic FSK" is the dumbest bullshit idea he's had yet.

Meanwhile in AI research LLMs (that stands for Large Language Models btw) are exhibiting emergent behaviors like developing theories of mind, causal world models and doing things that are not present in the training data.

Every time you insinuate somebody has their head up their ass, it’s always a good idea to consider yourself the prime candidate.

Which would entail you, and now me, should consider that.

did water exist before humans? ask a pre-historic fish...

they didn't exist either...

that's not a fossil

-Imp

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 2:42 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 1:36 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 10:50 am [linguistic FSK]

The snake has its arse entirely up inside its head now.
A "Linguistic FSK" is the dumbest bullshit idea he's had yet.

Meanwhile in AI research LLMs (that stands for Large Language Models btw) are exhibiting emergent behaviors like developing theories of mind, causal world models and doing things that are not present in the training data.

Every time you insinuate somebody has their head up their ass, it’s always a good idea to consider yourself the prime candidate.

Basically a Linguistic FSK is any framework and system that are conditioned upon linguistic elements in enabling knowledge.

Note for example;
A linguistic framework for knowledge, belief, and
veridicality judgement

Linguistics needs a framework, in order to provide
 a sense of what the discipline is, and what makes it coherent across its various subdisciplines;
 what its relation is to our future needs.
https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/Wei ... s00065.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_language
In analytic philosophy, philosophy of language investigates the nature of language and the relations between language, language users, and the world.[1] Investigations may include inquiry into the nature of meaning, intentionality, reference, the constitution of sentences, concepts, learning, and thought.
In continental philosophy, language is not studied as a separate discipline. Rather, it is an inextricable part of many other areas of thought, such as phenomenology, structural semiotics,[3] language of mathematics, hermeneutics, existentialism, deconstruction and critical theory.


Yes, in AI, the Linguistic FSK is critical.
For example, ChatGPT is language driven, thus require a linguistic FSK to guide its usage.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 4:35 pm Which would entail you, and now me, should consider that.

I know my head's up my ass, but never quite as far as the philosophers I encounter.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 6:54 am
I know my head's up my ass, but never quite as far as the philosophers I encounter.

How many philosophers have you got in there?

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:30 am How many philosophers have you got in there?

At least you it seems.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:31 am

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:30 am How many philosophers have you got in there?

At least you it seems.

Thank goodness things are not always what they seem.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:34 am

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:31 am

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 7:30 am How many philosophers have you got in there?

At least you it seems.

Thank goodness things are not always what they seem.

Sometimes they aren't. And sometimes they are.