• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • See https://www.intpforum.com/threads/upgrade-at-10-am-gmt.27631/

Search results

  1. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    Unfortunately couldn't find any of his books online (amazon says out of print). You may also find AC Mukherjee (https://jaygarfield.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/ac-mukerji.pdf) interesting (though I haven't read him). I found some of his books from archive. The kyoto school philosophers - "the...
  2. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    I don't really have any idea about what Pierce or Sellars was exactly up to. I haven't really read their stuff. I don't really have the mental resource these days to go through all that Piercian neologisms. They are on the reading list, but I have many other grounds to cover before reaching...
  3. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    Also: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sellars/#4
  4. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    "One implication of the unending nature of the interpretation of appearances through infinite sequences of signs is that Peirce cannot be any type of epistemological foundationalist or believer in absolute or apodeictic knowledge. He must be, and is, an anti-foundationalist and a fallibilist...
  5. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    But if you read what the original ancient skeptics (Pyrrhonians) themselves had to say ....they justified their actions exactly in terms of how nature simply necessitates them to act in certain ways. They followed common sense, convention, appearances, and the forces of nature. What their...
  6. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    Regarding epistemology, I still find the idea behind Cartesian Doubt appealing. I am not very updated on cutting edge epistemology, but personally, for now, I have settled with something which I may call "epistemology based on doubt". Basically, I rank beliefs and ideas based on how difficult...
  7. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    I don't know much about Descartes beyond meditations, but there is a charitable interpretation of Descartes according to which all Descartes meant to affirm was the undeniable presence of a self however short or long, enduring, or not whatever it is. Thoughts are also perceptions. Though the...
  8. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    You´ve died...

    what is everything that you can tell me about everything you know barring things that will not be too interesting if I were to know them, where 'thing' is to be conceived as loosely as possible?
  9. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    My Philosophy in Everyday Fucking Language

    ing In meditations, he avoided using 'therefore'. His main point was that 'I' is something he could not coherently doubt. Upon more charitable interpretation, he was affirming the primordial intuitive sense of being that cannot be reasonably doubted. He didn't really necessarily meant it had to...
  10. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    I was just going on a tangent. It was a jab against those who assign some form of quasi-logical or metaphysical necessity to God using things like PSR. From what I have seen logical necessities seems to only belong to relational ideas and if-then claims and mathematical claims "given axiom...
  11. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    It is a definition. Like bachelor = unmarried male.
  12. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    I am still talking about logical impossibility of logical necessity of being. And I haven't made any assumptions about actual possibility to do that as far as I am aware. So where in my original post or in my second post did I assume logical possibility has anything to do with actual...
  13. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    It is logically possible that black is white when looking at it only syntactically. Following common conventions about what is black and white - we can say something purely black is not white and vice versa. Given that as a premise if we say if something being purely black and purely white at...
  14. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    I am not adding existence to any particular subject to enlarge it. Therefore I am not using existence as a real predicate.
  15. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    Where am I equating logical possibility with actual possibility? I only spoke of logical possibility, logical necessity and logical impossibility, all of which are connected. I never mentioned anything about actual possibility.
  16. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    How important are inner thoughts or feelings and emotions in the world?

    https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/441445-there-are-nowadays-professors-of-philosophy-but-not-philosophers
  17. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    There is no reason for the creator of meaning to have meaning. But for any meaning to not end up in meaninglessness must itself be supported by some further meaning. By necessary (in necessary being), I meant logically necessary. By definition, if not-X is logically possible, X is not logically...
  18. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    what do you look most forward to in 2019

    I wanna experience cessation.
  19. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    How important are inner thoughts or feelings and emotions in the world?

    AFAIK, objective knowledge isn't denied by the majority of philosophers at least in analytical circles. And most aren't epistemological nihilists either.
  20. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Let's psychoanalyze our mothers

    That's not sufficient. The creator of meaning itself must have some meaning to be. And the applied purpose itself should be something purposeful. So you have two option, either the chain of meaning ends somewhere (making the whole chain unsupported), or the chain of meaning continues infinitely...
  21. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    How important are inner thoughts or feelings and emotions in the world?

    Mental images are real too.
  22. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    @The Grey Man I found this guy: John M. Taurek He basically publicly published this one paper: "Should the numbers count?" He is saying a lot of same things as you. It also helped me understand you better. You may find some sense of soliditary in his paper...
  23. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    What is wrong with modern life

    Because they commit to speculation and conjectures without doing any real empirical research.
  24. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    On the Vacuity of the Concept of Existence

    I do evil even if I know it harms me and contributes to the harm of others. The evil will compels me. It is not rational.
  25. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    On the Vacuity of the Concept of Existence

    It's better understood in the context of ontological arguments for God (like Anselm). The arguments usually go like how God must necessarily exist by definition and stuff (not going to expand). The vacuity of existence as predicate arguments are often used to point out the logical flaws in such...
  26. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Plato's Cave

    You can ask Moore ( a non-skeptic) the same thing. Moore seems to think they are different. And he also dedicated the first portions of his paper "proof of external world" dedicated to differentiating objects in space and objects that can be met in space or something like that.
  27. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    Sure; I wasn't arguing for or against the merits of definitions. I am not even sure how to exactly determine the merits of a definition in general beyond checking for some simple measurew. But using a conventional definition is easier if for the very fact that it is conventional - language...
  28. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    On why we work and the nature of reality

    I have a really crazy theory ....reality is made of .....reality.
  29. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Plato's Cave

    I think it can be used in multiple contexts, but there may not be as many room for interpreting it - as in interpreting what it meant to be in its original context. AFAIK, it was pretty clearly used to promote the idea of forms - how those who can grasp the forms that underlie sensory phenomenon...
  30. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    Colloquial dictionaries aren't usually a proper source for more sophisticated concepts if they are to be used in more formal contexts. It is a common standard to include "null hypothesis" in the set of hypotheses - it's not like just one eccentric PhD holder is mutilating the definition. But...
  31. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    Plato's Cave

    As far as I remember, Moore did fabricate a story. He didn't simply say that he has a hand in his experience, but that he has a veridical perception (by veridical he meant it's not a hallucination or a dream or even one from the phenomenal world of idealism) - i.e for him his hand is something...
  32. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    I didn't know that that's the standard definition of hypothesis - that hypothesis can't ever be about an absence of some entity or relation. Do you have a source that shows that your conventions are standard? I searched wikipedia. Since not everyone may find Wikipedia to be appealing, I went...
  33. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    I am not sure why you are suddenly focusing on "something else". I am not even sure what you are exactly referring to. If it is this part, I was merely using it in a similar sense as how people use 'etc'. This is just to leave a room open for other possibilities and types of hypotheses that I...
  34. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    What do you think substance is?

    No foundation. No substance.
  35. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    A negative/null hypothesis is still a hypothesis. The example doesn't explicitly indicate the presence of third phenomenon, but it doesn't explicitly tell anything about it being absent either. And now for the billion trillion bajillion dollar question...how????? I don't know. I have heard...
  36. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    Since we were discussing Occam's Razor, 'usefulness' is not really directly relevant. In terms of usefulness, the co-incidence hypothesis can serve as a null hypothesis in practice - which can be abandoned in favor of some alternative hypothesis if there is a statistically significant...
  37. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    I won't deny that this raises some question. But my point is that it's not perfectly clear that the other position is strictly superior to it in any straightforward manner at least in terms of Occam's Razor. Even in a usual non-solipsist world, the objects in the solipsists' consciousness...
  38. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    But you are forced to choose one, or at least live like as if one is true unless you are not bothered by the suffering of strangers at all. If you keep on walking without caring about if your steps bring immense pain to the materials making up the road then either you don't care about other's...
  39. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    It's a matter of phrasing. A1: All bodies are conscious A2: Only One body is conscious. I am not sure how exactly one is more presumptuous than the other if phrased like this. All vs only One - both are assumptions. But if someone interprets Occam's razor as that if two hypotheses have equal...
  40. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    There are no 'solid' grounds which is what my point was mentioning 'epistemic hole'. I honestly don't know too much about Ockham's Razor. Of course, I know the standard definition and stuff, but I don't think I know deeply enough about it. From what I have seen, there are varying...
  41. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    Do you mean objectively observable potential correlations of suffering? Can we measure them and make 'expected values' out of them? Can they be 'useful'? If so, why are they 'useful'? What do they tell us about if not suffering? Even though they themselves are not suffering directly...
  42. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    It does tell something important namely that the conceptual system is untrue (or very likely to be untrue). The impossibility of true contradictions is one of the few things that approaches near absolute certainty if not truly absolute; up there with "I". It is not always clear if a conceptual...
  43. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    But the planet X, I was speaking of doesn't have anything but phenomenal appearances. There is no cow killing people, there are only subjective experiences of being killed by a cow. In planet X, therefore, it is not correct to imagine people dying by cows. We should be them imagining from the...
  44. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    How can I add the cow deaths to my imagination model. Those cow deaths are inseparable parts (dependent origination) of the isolated subjective experiences of the one who experiences the death. If I can add 'components' of subjective experiences of different people in my imagination why can I...
  45. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    I wanted to respond to this before. I may be the unity behind the multiplicity in perception, but it is not clear that I is THE unity behind ALL multiplicity that may exist in ALL perception. There can be in principle multiple simple Is, each being numerically different, yet qualitatively...
  46. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    The needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the few

    But if the cows are merely subjective experiences, aren't they 'simple'. So if by chance, we live in an intersubjective world without anything much living outside the bubbles of consciousness, will nothing be countable? I can experience varying 'intensity' of suffering. Anything that has an...
  47. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    3 idiots walk into a quantum mechanics

    Law of attraction is too new agey. I would rather prefer chaos magick.
  48. DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

    3 idiots walk into a quantum mechanics

    Looks like someone is studying quantum physics from you tube.
Top Bottom