A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Should you think about your duty, or about the consequences of your actions? Or should you concentrate on becoming a good person?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am I am relying on the authority of
biologists from the science-biology FSK who confirm there are real goats;
And I am relying on the authority of deflationists to point out that nothing changes about the goat by appending the adjective "real"
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am If they are wrong,
then I will welcome any other more reliable sources of FSK facts.
This has nothing to do with being right or wrong.

It has to do with the simple fact that adjectives have no ontological significance. Real or not the goat is still a goat.

And so bickering over adjectives is my definition of "stupid philosophical bullshit".
Last edited by Skepdick on Wed May 31, 2023 10:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:59 am
Flannel Jesus wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:50 am I have no idea what all of that is saying. I'm saying something quite simple: if goats are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental, perhaps minds are not real because they are emergent and not fundamental.

-or-

Perhaps things that are emergent can also be "real".
that is a strawman.
I find your points confusing.
'I never claim goats are not real' without qualification.

This is a hit and miss approach, hope it hit.

Regardless of the confusion, my stance is;
FSK-ed minds are real subject to the degree of objectivity of the FSK.
Thus any concept of mind from the scientific FSK is real as dealt within psychology.

The question of 'fundamental' i.e. mind-independent claimed by philosophical realists is a non-starter for me.
The whole nonsense is just a philosophical quabble over the meaning of "exists".
Exists is not a predicate; exist is merely "is" thus a copula to connect the subject with the predicate.
What exists as real must therefore be predicated, in this case the specific FSK of which the most credible and reliable is the Scientific FSK.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:07 am Exists is not a predicate; exist is merely "is" thus a copula to connect the subject with the predicate.
What exists as real must therefore be predicated, in this case the specific FSK of which the most credible and reliable is the Scientific FSK.
OK, it's not a predicate. It's a metaphysical assertion.

The goat is.
The goat exists.

Swapping "exists" for "is" doesn't change anything - you are still on the metaphysical merry-go-round.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:07 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am I am relying on the authority of
biologists from the science-biology FSK who confirm there are real goats;
And I am relying on the authority of deflationists to point out that nothing changes about the goat by appending the adjective "real"
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am If they are wrong,
then I will welcome any other more reliable sources of FSK facts.
This has nothing to do with being right or wrong.

It has to do with the simple fact that adjectives have no ontological significance. Real or not the goat is still a goat.

And so bickering over adjectives is my definition of "stupid philosophical bullshit".
Deflationism is not effective for this issue.

If you see any animal and not sure whether it is a goat or otherwise, who do you refer to?
Surely not deflationist?

The effective authority to decide whether an animal is a goat or not-a-goat would be a biologist [with that specialty] who is conditioned upon the science-biology-FSK. If not, who else?
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:13 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:07 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am I am relying on the authority of
biologists from the science-biology FSK who confirm there are real goats;
And I am relying on the authority of deflationists to point out that nothing changes about the goat by appending the adjective "real"
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:04 am If they are wrong,
then I will welcome any other more reliable sources of FSK facts.
This has nothing to do with being right or wrong.

It has to do with the simple fact that adjectives have no ontological significance. Real or not the goat is still a goat.

And so bickering over adjectives is my definition of "stupid philosophical bullshit".
Deflationism is not effective for this issue.

If you see any animal and not sure whether it is a goat or otherwise, who do you refer to?
Surely not deflationist?

The effective authority to decide whether an animal is a goat or not-a-goat would be a biologist [with that specialty] who is conditioned upon the science-biology-FSK. If not, who else?
You seem to have changed the subject from the animal's existence to the animal itself.

We aren't concerned with whether the animal is; or isn't a goat.
We are concerned with whether the goat exists.

Suppose we are wrong - the goat doesn't exist, but it's still eating grandma's roses. What now?
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:10 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:07 am Exists is not a predicate; exist is merely "is" thus a copula to connect the subject with the predicate.
What exists as real must therefore be predicated, in this case the specific FSK of which the most credible and reliable is the Scientific FSK.
OK, it's not a predicate. It's a metaphysical assertion.

The goat is.
The goat exists.

Swapping "exists" for "is" doesn't change anything - you are still on the metaphysical merry-go-round.
"The goat is" is groundless and too bald.

The goat or domestic goat (Capra hircus) is a domesticated species of goat-antelope typically kept as livestock as confirmed by the science-biology FSK, not because somebody father or mother said so.

The goat is the following as conditioned upon science-biology FSK;
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:14 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:13 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:07 am
And I am relying on the authority of deflationists to point out that nothing changes about the goat by appending the adjective "real"


This has nothing to do with being right or wrong.

It has to do with the simple fact that adjectives have no ontological significance. Real or not the goat is still a goat.

And so bickering over adjectives is my definition of "stupid philosophical bullshit".
Deflationism is not effective for this issue.

If you see any animal and not sure whether it is a goat or otherwise, who do you refer to?
Surely not deflationist?

The effective authority to decide whether an animal is a goat or not-a-goat would be a biologist [with that specialty] who is conditioned upon the science-biology-FSK. If not, who else?
You seem to have changed the subject from the animal's existence to the animal itself.

We aren't concerned with whether the animal is; or isn't a goat.
We are concerned with whether the goat exists.

Suppose we are wrong - the goat doesn't exist, but it's still eating grandma's roses. What now?
There is no question of 'the goat doesn't exist.'
There are tons of empirical evidence to verify and justify goats do exist as confirmed by the science-biology FSK.
This should be a non issue.

Note the issue is whether the macro-goat or the micro-goat is more realistic?
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Wed May 31, 2023 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:18 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:10 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:07 am Exists is not a predicate; exist is merely "is" thus a copula to connect the subject with the predicate.
What exists as real must therefore be predicated, in this case the specific FSK of which the most credible and reliable is the Scientific FSK.
OK, it's not a predicate. It's a metaphysical assertion.

The goat is.
The goat exists.

Swapping "exists" for "is" doesn't change anything - you are still on the metaphysical merry-go-round.
"The goat is" is groundless and too bald.

The goat or domestic goat (Capra hircus) is a domesticated species of goat-antelope typically kept as livestock as confirmed by the science-biology FSK, not because somebody father or mother said so.

The goat is the following as conditioned upon science-biology FSK;
I don't give a fuck about the goat, dude.

I am talking about the goat's existence.

The goat's existence is a semantic property. A mental attitude towards the goat.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:23 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:18 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:10 am
OK, it's not a predicate. It's a metaphysical assertion.

The goat is.
The goat exists.

Swapping "exists" for "is" doesn't change anything - you are still on the metaphysical merry-go-round.
"The goat is" is groundless and too bald.

The goat or domestic goat (Capra hircus) is a domesticated species of goat-antelope typically kept as livestock as confirmed by the science-biology FSK, not because somebody father or mother said so.

The goat is the following as conditioned upon science-biology FSK;
I don't give a fuck about the goat, dude.

I am talking about the goat's existence.

The goat's existence is a semantic property. A mental attitude towards the goat.
I was never interested in the semantic property of the goat's existence.

I stated,
Note the issue re OP is whether the macro-goat or the micro-goat is more realistic?
My main issue is the philosophical realists' focus is on the mind-independent macro-goat and ignore the micro-goat which is relatively more refined.
Even if they shift their focus to the micro-goat, it is still problematic for them because they are grounding it on an illusion.
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Wed May 31, 2023 10:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:22 am There is no question of 'the goat doesn't exist.'
The question manifests the moment you append the adjective "exists" to the goat.

ALL adjectives express mental attitudes.

I see the fucking goat.

Which particular thing about the goat is its "existence"?
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:28 am
Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:23 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:18 am
"The goat is" is groundless and too bald.

The goat or domestic goat (Capra hircus) is a domesticated species of goat-antelope typically kept as livestock as confirmed by the science-biology FSK, not because somebody father or mother said so.

The goat is the following as conditioned upon science-biology FSK;
I don't give a fuck about the goat, dude.

I am talking about the goat's existence.

The goat's existence is a semantic property. A mental attitude towards the goat.
I was never interested in the semantic property of the goat's existence.
Really?

So if you aren't talking about epistemology when you are using the adjective "exists" to qualify the goat, then you must be talking about ontology.

Point at the goat's existence already.

Point at the goat's existence like you can point at its hoof.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12242
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Skepdick wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:30 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:22 am There is no question of 'the goat doesn't exist.'
The question manifests the moment you append the adjective "exists" to the goat.

ALL adjectives express mental attitudes.

I see the fucking goat.

Which particular thing about the goat is its "existence"?
Exist: have objective reality or being.
'Exist' is a verb and naturally extended to 'existence' - noun.
I am not interested in the semantics aspects at all, other than listing down what they actually mean in the above.

Thus the most effective basis to deal with exist and existence is the following;
What is real & exist, as facts, truths, knowledge, and objectivity is conditioned upon a specific human based FSK.
How else?

When you see a goat, you need to invoke [or reference] the science-biology-FSK [verify, repeat testing, justify,] to ensure you are seeing a real objective goat and not an illusion.
Skepdick
Posts: 14347
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Skepdick »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 10:43 am Exist: have objective reality or being.

'Exist' is a verb and naturally extended to 'existence' - noun.
I am not interested in the semantics aspects at all, other than listing down what they actually mean in the above.

Thus the most effective basis to deal with exist and existence is the following;
What is real & exist, as facts, truths, knowledge, and objectivity is conditioned upon a specific human based FSK.
How else?

When you see a goat, you need to invoke [or reference] the science-biology-FSK [verify, repeat testing, justify,] to ensure you are seeing a real objective goat and not an illusion.
Aaaand onto the merry-go-round again!

using 3 metaphysical words (objective, reality, being) to define 1 metaphysical word.

Let me get you a shovel. You seem determined to stay in the metaphysical cave.

So what if it's an illusion? It's a bloody persistent illusion! It's still eating grandma's roses!
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 9:12 am To be even more realistic [realist version], we should state,
there is bundle and cluster of molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in time t and space[l] then track the existence of every molecules and atoms with electrons and particles in motion in its specific time t and specific location in space[l].
No, no. To be really, super, special-real we should talk about clusters of subatomic particles, quarks, say.
But actually look at that fake noun CLUSTERS and it's horrible near synonym BUNDLES.
We gotta get rid of those to.

So we say something like

there are some subatomic particles over there near the barn.

But quarks aren't just in motion. Sometimes they sort of appear and sometimes they disappear. That quantum foam has net stabilities, sort of, but you can borrow from nothing, for example.

So, a realist would have to say, there's some changing numbers and motions of subatomic particles over there

And if they don't say that, they are communicating poorly.

A realist farmer, of course, wouldn't manage to keep his crops or animals alive.

An anti-realist famer would say 'here-there there's a mindgoat glob of quarks'. I am not sure where they should point when they say this. Perhaps one finger towards their own non-mind independent skull and one in the direction where the globgoat-side of the mind seems to come from but really doesn't.

Here's a question. A man is standing in a field with goats. He hasn't seen the goats. One of the goats sees him. The first time he realizes there might be a goat is when it head butts him from behind.

Did the goat coalesce out of the quantum foam just before or just when it struck him? IOW was there ever a goat running toward the man's butt?

My sense is anti-realist farmers would be as incompetent as VA's version of realist farmers, you know the guys never talking about goats or corn stalks, just pointing vaguely at different areas of quarks.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6209
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: A Macro Goat or A Cluster of Micro Particles?

Post by FlashDangerpants »

TIL: The only real stuff is unobservable, purely theoretical particles whose existence is deduced via 3 generations of theory dependent observation, and everything else is the product of faulty imagination. And the moral implications of this? That all knowledge is formed on a finders keepers first come first served FSK basis... and that ladies and gentlemen is how we learn that it is a FSK-fact[moral, human, animal] that nothing you do to animals has any moral implication.

It's shocking really that I never connected the dots without the magnificent mister Vegetable Armpit to put it all together for me.
Post Reply