Perhaps you could tell me what is certain. Philosophy is wonder, mine is just reasonable conjecture. If you find the reasoning faulty, by all means, enlighten me. — boagie

I'm just asking what the justification would be for "for us, there is no direct knowledge of reality." What prompts you to say that? What's the grounding for it? If you were arguing for it, what would your argument be?

What did Russia think would happen? — RogueAI

Probably not that they would become a satellite of China, but that's the reality.

For us, it is our only subjective reality and for us, there is no direct knowledge of reality. — boagie

I guess the question then, is: how do you know this?

Finland joins NATO

The Penguin is very treacherous.

Trump has landed in the viper's den, New York, — NOS4A2

... where he was met at JFK by Cat Woman and the Penguin. They drove to Trump Tower where they met the Joker

That looks just like Bray-fart from Scotchland, London. — unenlightened

Could be the same guy?

My house has become a den of red, black, and white.
— frank

White Stripes fan? — Isaac

:lol: I used to listen to "Ball and a Biscuit" on the way to work.

None of which rules out the experience of redness.
— frank

No. The experience of 'redness' is ruled out by there being no evidence, nor need, for any such thing. — Isaac

I need it. My house has become a den of red, black, and white. I don't want curtains that cause me to reach for the word "red." I need red curtains.

Furthermore, I don't need red curtains that represent something I do. I just need the red curtains.

Let's dispense with the unnecessary abuse of language going on in this thread. :razz:

Fascism is a pretty general term these days, but it's exact meaning isn't the point. — Isaac

It shouldn't be. It had a specific meaning that we do well to keep in mind because it was associated with a disaster we don't want to repeat. Using it as an all purpose insult is a dishonor to all the victims of real fascism.

I can’t blame someone for getting on the tax-payer gravy chain — NOS4A2

Or gravy train. It's excellent gravy.

Secession from reality. — Michael

Could be.

And who is credibly accused of fomenting the January 6th secession — Wayfarer

There was no secession. Secession is when a state leaves the union.

Taking what we currently have, for example, and just ditching government regulation is fascism (it would be a fascism of corporate rule). — Isaac

Fascism is specifically about nationalism and an aggressive military. The ills of corporate rule are not correctly called "fascism ". It's just the dark side of liberalism.

I've given an account of the need to reduce external surprise from both an evolutionary perspective and from a purely systems theory perspective. any self identifying system has to combat entropy gradients (in terms of information) and those gradients are Gaussian. so we minimise surprise, we treat things consistently, and (to the best of our ability) in ways which give predictable results based on their actual external-world states. — Isaac

None of which rules out the experience of redness. In fact, your view is more consistent with first person data than opposed to it.

can't think of a single reason why would just go about asking each other what our private thoughts are called? — Isaac

I can't either. We ask things like: what's that red thing over there?

The question is... "in what way are we treating the post box?" — Isaac

It could have been: "what's that red thing over there?"

When we say "the post box is red" we don't mean that there's some thing 'redness' which the post box possesses, we're instead declaring and reconfirming our joint commitment to treating the post box a certain way. — Isaac

I don't think so. "The post box is red" is the answer to some question. Understand the question, and you'll understand the answer.

Ultimately all theories of meaning come down to: what was the question?

Eh, at this point it’s like whack-a-mole. Almost random snippets, but no consistency and no logic. Perhaps leave the man and his fascist agenda to his dreamworld and let him be happy with that. — Mikie

There's nothing random about his posts. They're very consistent and logical. If you familiarize yourself with fascism, you'll see that his view is exactly the opposite of it.

So you’re fine with restricting the rights of others if it suits your fascist agenda. — Mikie

There's absolutely nothing fascist about his agenda.

The point is, governments do not build roads. — NOS4A2

They could if they wanted to.

I meant construction companies do not collect taxes. — NOS4A2

It's not their job to collect taxes. They do receive public funds for public works, though.

Private companies build the vast majority of roads and infrastructure, and they don’t collect taxes. — NOS4A2

Those are toll roads. They do collect funds, they just don't call it taxes.

Not forever, though. It will be remembered that he attempted a coup.

Like I said, word crimes. He spoke and I felt some way, therefor it’s a crime. — NOS4A2

Word crimes were as far as it could go because the Joint Chiefs of Staff were determined that his coup wasn't going to succeed. Don't really need a deep state to explain your failure when the US Military is against you.

But you could triangulate the height of the walkers with some distance data. I think that would qualify as direct.

The greatest argument for indirect realism is anatomy and physiology. Plain and simple. Whatever flaws it may have, that hurdle is insurmountable.

Trump's punishment will probably be a small fine that he won't even notice.

Naive realism leads to physics, and physics, if true, shows that naive realism is false. Therefore naive realism, if true, is false; therefore it is false. — Michael

Exactly!

Okey dokey.

:rofl: at this conversation. — Mikie

I also think it's funny. But then, I'm a raging nihilist.

Yeah. That's a common condensation. The approach he is advocating is rather than trying to do philosophy by finding the meaning of terms, to look at the use that they take on in the language game and the broader form of life. — Banno

Oh, by "meaning" you mean an all purpose definition.

We can't do gun control, and you can't have an abortion. :100:

Then he cut to the chase: Stop looking for meaning, and instead look at use. — Banno

I thought he meant you find meaning by looking at use.

If that is conceded, then you have to ask yourself with Trump whether forebearance makes sense in terms of causing outrage among his supporters and an empowering of his position. — Hanover

Turning assholes into martyrs is counter productive. But who decides to push forward or pull back?

With our annual summer riots, that decision is actually coming from mayors and chiefs of police. They don't want a massacre on their hands.

Who would decide not to prosecute Trump because of unfortunate side effects? The DA?

The basis was politics, not justice. Maybe it was the right call, but the point is that politics is a valid consideration too — Hanover

People were mainly thinking about justice for the black guy who was brutally murdered by the white cop. Public safety was the concern that prompted forbearance on the part of riot police.

Did Democrat politicians play it for all it was worth? Probably. I don't see how you'd identity that as the basis for anything. That's just what smart politicians do.

Cities burned in lawlessness as politicians offered tempered politically motivated responses the past few years. — Hanover

That wasn't due to a lack of interest in law enforcement. They were trying to avoid making the protesters more violent.

Of course a gun can be used for defense, provided you are prepared for an attack and in a defendable position. Outside of that, successful defense is unlikely. A motivated shooter will generally have the advantage, and bullets flying around from random shots might find you anywhere. — BC

I guess if you find that trench warfare has broken out in your living room, it's hard to say who'll have the advantage. You'll probably have to Jackie Chan the situation.

As to owning a gun to defend myself and my family against criminals, it is not as if they are going to wait until I get my gun, load it, and point it at them before they point their loaded gun at me or a family member. Perhaps you sleep cuddling a loaded gun, but I think it far more likely that a gun in the house will do me or my family harm than good. — Fooloso4

You can defend yourself with an unloaded shotgun. Just cock it and that sound will generally cause invaders to flee. Unless they're on drugs, in which case you probably want it loaded.

Guns can definitely be used for defense. If you choose to go without, just know that your final victory was that you didn't live in fear.

Or something along those lines. :grin:

They don't want this issue addressed because it would reduce demand for their products even if they were legal. You're aiding that agenda by sweeping the issue aside. — Isaac

The view from the ground here is that in some parts of the US, people are fiercely protective of their ability to own fire arms. Gun sales always spike when legislation for limiting gun ownership is considered. People are afraid that they won't be able to get that hand gun in the future, so they go ahead and buy it now. So that demand is high and not manufactured by anyone in particular. It's just part of the culture.

Mass shootings get a lot of media coverage. I think that actually perpetuates it, oddly enough. But gun violence goes on all day everyday in the form of gang violence, drive-by shootings, and red-neck family members shooting at each other. I mean, lives are destroyed and families are left in despair pretty frequently. We don't really need mass shootings for that. Mass shootings just get the coverage because they're so bizarre. Prevalent, but bizarre.

:up:

Well, I wouldn't count that as a fact... — Banno

Why not?