The Gettier problem is, in a general form, as follows: a person has a false belief a, from which a conclusion b is drawn. It is then found out that a was false, yet b is true (although only when interpreted in some different way). — BlueBanana

Have you got an example of this?

Really? The risks people say he took in painting weren't so much related to his topics (which tended to be dark and violent). It was in specific brush strokes that could destroy the whole painting. — frank

Can you show an example so we are talking about the same thing?
IN any event - there are not really any negative consequences except a repaint - not exactly end of life stuff.
As a artist, when you get the art buying world behind you, you can pretty much make what shit you like and get sold, not that he needed the money.
Where is the risk ?

Ah yes, I'd forgotten your supernatural ability to divine a person's deepest intentions from just 6 — Pseudonym

Childish straw man!! LOL
Unless Mr banana is a Victorian gentleman, or both of you are pair of misogynistic twats - would it hurt you to use a gender inclusive word like the rest of the people in the English speaking world: human, human being, people..
Maybe you two are from Texas or something?

↪charleton you might grow a fungus in your beard. — CuddlyHedgehog

That is always a risk, but I fail to see the relevance!

Firstly, unless you are a mind reader you cannot possibly know what definition he had in mind — Pseudonym

Yes I can: the context.
The mention of the phrase "American Dream" is not relevant. My query about that was how the data was gathered.
1988 is a long time ago, and the use of "Man" is now defunct. Try using it at college and see how far you get. In fact it's been anathema since at least as long ago as 1990 in academic circles and throughout the media.

Like if you paint a penis on Kim Young Un's face, that would be risky. I'm sure there are other examples, but that one came to mind. — Hanover

Why is that risky? If you live in N. Korea I'd not recommend it - but what adverse consequences are there?

Adorno used to say , if you are paying attention then you can never be happy. He responded to the idiotic American "Have a nice Day". The world is full of horrors. Sometimes the only response is humour.
And so to Camus and the absurd.

Oxford English Dictionary definition of 'man' - "2A human being of either sex; a person." — Pseudonym

He did not use this form of definition, which is, incidentally about 40 years out of date. Not "MAN" but men.

I think we've come to the conclusion it is a neologism. Another good, but not new, word. — T Clark

Can you give an example?

Here's an interesting article about about monetary policy. I'd be interested in those of you who have an economics background to get your thoughts. My feeling is that the national debt crisis may be blown somewhat out of proportion, but this subject is much more complicated than saying, "The sky is falling because of our debt." — Sam26

The US is a sovereign nation and could half national debt simply by printing half the amount of that debt. Monetary sovereignty before "Reaganomics", "Thatcheromics" and all that, was employed to keep the economy moving onwards against the onslaught of inequality, off-shore accounts, and CEO bonus culture. The reason they decide not to do that is that those in power are the rich and do not want their savings to be devalued (all debt is held by someone). They also think it ideologically sound to keep large sections of the population in austerity and poverty.
The sky is not falling. "Our debt" is another's wealth.

Can you all please go and discuss global warming somewhere else. My topic is Ecophilosophy, and you are getting in the way. — unenlightened

Obviously they are completely unconnected.

It is mere coincidence that the ink drops look so much like the forms of jellyfish? — StreetlightX

Everything looks like something else when you are a pattern seeking animal. Ink drops fall, and by the reverse effort a jellyfish propels itself upwards. But there are other ways to do this.

Hanoverisms — TimeLine

Not even a word is it?
Can you give an example?

I'm in a Francis Bacon (the painter) phase. I was reading that his painting style was partly a result of a need for risk-taking that showed up in other areas of his life. — frank

I'm not sure is any kind of painting is really risky since there are not really any adverse consequences to painting a bad picture. Someone will always like it.
Of what you might call his risky paintings, they seem to be rather inward and contemplative.

For example, if 10% of people voted last year and 20% of people voted this year, that's described as an increase of 100%, not 10%. — Michael

If 10 people had voted for Trump in the year before the election, and only 100 in the election year, Trump would not be President, despite getting an increase of 1000%.

The reason the absolute numbers are important is that we do not know what role a trace chemical can play in the temperature.

Your numbers are off. When the Keeling Curve begins, in 1957, the atmospheric CO2 concentration was about 315ppm and now it is 410ppm. That's a 30% increase in just 61 years. It's likely larger now than it has been over the last several million years, and it's still rising about 1% more every two years. — Pierre-Normand

Modern measurements whilst they represent modern concentrations are not directly comparable with historical data. comparing your number my figures are accurate.
25-30% increase of nothing is next to nothing.
Since Co2 only accounts for a tiny bit of global temperature in the first place why quibble over this since we our atmosphere did not boil away into space when it was a Jurassic 10,000ppm. GW needs something more sophisticated than Co2 to account for any rises.

Co2 is a political tool. The real issues are extinction, drop in species diversity, deforestation, the pollution of the oceans and lack of conservation of natural environments.

I take all these to be true. But if I’m missing something here, what would that be? — javra

A sense of proportion!!
Co2 has proportionately been 100s times higher in prehistoric times.
These days there is only a trace amount of Co2, and the carrying capacity of 0.041% is not significantly greater than 0.035% as it was 100 years ago.
However. Plants have the ability to respond to higher concentrations of Co2 up to a full 1% by taken in the carbon and making cellulose and lignin. Hence my comment about TREES.

This fact is all you need to know about Global Warming.
Facts 5: Loss of forests contributes between 12 percent and 17 percent of annual global greenhouse gas emissions. (World Resources Institute)
if we could preserves what we have, and recover what we have lost, there is no amount of CO2 we could throw into the atmosphere that trees could not rebalance.

Sadly the same web page that gave you that fact fails to see the moronic irony of their last fact.

Fact 51: Seek knowledge on deforestation and how can you prevent it from happening by reading newspapers, magazines, internet, TV shows. Spread the word and make it go viral.

How about STOP buying newspapers and magazines?

You mean that whole thing about carbon dioxide being a greenhouse gas? Whose to say? Why, I once heard that there's one scientist somewhere that someone heard about that disagrees. It's all so uncertain. (My compliments to those who don't take me seriously here.) — javra

The atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased 0.01-2% in 100 years. The hysterical claims of the green lobby are unable to mobilise physical science to use this fact to explain the Global warming that exists.

Justice: equality in treatment in all men.
Selfishness: treating yourself above others.
Therefore, by definition, selfishness is unjust. — Samuel Lacrampe

This conclusion is false. It is no conclusion at all.
I think women are more important than men since men are incapable of giving birth. Different roles in society require different treatment. You can't even bring yourself to mention women. You have failed this simple test again and again.
To some degree we all have to treat ourselves before others since we would be incapable of working for others were we to not first look after ourselves.
If you were to stay hungry before ensuring the rest of humanity were properly fed, then you'd be dead before you got very far.

This fact is all you need to know about Global Warming.
Facts 5: Loss of forests contributes between 12 percent and 17 percent of annual global greenhouse gas emissions. (World Resources Institute)
if we could preserves what we have, and recover what we have lost, there is no amount of CO2 we could throw into the atmosphere that trees could not rebalance.

There is no argument
THIS
is the last word in English.
Zyzzyva. It is a genus of tropical American weevils often found in association with palms.

World population is the least of our problems.
Western population is the problem.
Americans constitute 5% of the world's population but consume 24% of the world's energy. The population is projected to increase by nearly 130 million people - the equivalent of adding another four states the size of California - by the year 2050.

Yet, death invites tears and sorrow instead of what should be laughter and joy.

Comments... — TheMadFool

In their hearts no Christian really believes in a future state beyond death.

Under communism, it's not. Communism was a horrifying system. — Agustino

You've never seen such an example.
Capiitalism is global. You forget the all the starving under $1 a day people also live under the yoke of capitalism. Given a random placement the likely hood is that you would be one of those living under a $1 per day.
Maybe you should take your head out of your bum once in a whilst and try to see the bigger picture?
The other thing you might like to consider is the thread subject.
The morality of it , not whether or not you happen to live in a country where you benefit from Capitalism's immorality!

↪charleton Think of it this way. Imagine you went to a doctor for an operation, and the doctor told you that your body was actually a machine, and your mind was a computer. Would you deserve human rights? — Kenshin

I'd rather not think in terms of absurdities.

As in, the AI has the same subjective mental experience as a human being. The only difference is (1) it doesn't have a body, and (2) it was created artificially by man. — Kenshin

This is a contradiction since the subjective mental experience of humans is generated by their bodies. We have every reason to think the characteristics of this experience are unique to each bodily experience.

morality of capitalism
Dryness of the Sea.
Warmth of Ice.
Darkness of Light.

DEFINE....

self-aware — Kenshin

Oooo, aso, liminal. Liminal is...liminal. — Noble Dust

Love spiminal lace!!

I think Doble Nust is wompletely crong!

My favorite defenstration: — T Clark

I think the child went voluntarily. Don't think that counts

Malaprop is nice; especially in the context of the forum. — Noble Dust

Not as good as a Spoonerism!

Perambulation. — Baden

That's the poor cousin of peregrination.

Imagine you can live the rest of your life immorally and get away with it, societal or otherwise.
Would you still choose to be moral, why or why not? — Ruchi

One man's morality is another woman's immorality.
What, exactly is on your mind?

Justice is defined as: equality in treatment among all men. — Samuel Lacrampe

No it is not.
You obviously have a blind spot and have forgotten women AGAIN.
This indicates to me that you are not to be trusted with moral judgements.

For the sake of argument, suppose that what you say is true, that my belief in God prejudices me. So what? It would not change the validity of the argument in the OP, and you would still have to refute it. Suppose that Einstein was a nazi and discovered the formula "E = mc^2" for evil purposes. It does not follow that the formula is false. — Samuel Lacrampe

1) You have not presented ANY argument. All you have done is to assert a falsehood, which is definitively so.
2) Analogies as to the facts of physical reality are not relevant. Morals are about how people feel. People feel differently about various things. Morals are value judgements, not facts.

Not everybody agrees that the Earth is round (surprisingly). Does it follow that the shape of the Earth is subjective? — Samuel Lacrampe

Let me ask you this?
Can you prove that the round earth is good or bad?
You can demonstrate that the sun appears circular. You can even make 'circle' as defining by the shape of the sun. But can you demonstrate that the sun is evil or good?
Morals are not factual.
The closest you can get to objective morality is Law.

The truth is tha game had to be progressed, so i made the next post.
. — Harikrishna nair

When the Internet is closed, your mind gets opened.
To the . ......... , and far reaching .........

Vertical axis is the use of the term American Dream in writing. — René Descartes

LOL.
What a waste of time. Who does this shit?

How is each instance weighted?? Was it just the written word or would that include a film since they are mostly scripted?

Did the survey count each mention in every article book and film? Or did they consider each article, book and film with regard to its circulation? If so, did they weight films over books and books over academic articles?

Is the graph adjusted for population increase? Is the graph adjusted for the increase in printed media?
You might get the same result for any phrase.
The only thing of interest is the origin, which is later than I expected. But I do not think the rest of the graph is meaningful without understanding how the numbers are reached.

"Theft" implies taking someone else's property. If property is theft, then who is being stolen from? — Arkady

Why don't you think about it? Even you can work that one out.

1. Add a rule: You're not allowed to transfer ownership to the State. That in itself is a limitation to property rights so seems a bad choice given the framework. — Benkei

TO provide the sort of infrastructure capital needs to work it is vitally necessary to run most services at cost through the public sector taxation. Without this capitalism would not thrive. Think roads, police fire, schools. The state preserves the power to seize what land it needs for these activities.

2. Add a rule: A duty on the State to minimise public ownership. That could work (and raises practical issues but let's leave that for now).

That would be absurd. It's recipe for fall and decline.

3. Amend the ideology: it's not about private ownership but about respect of ownership in itself regardless of whether this is public or private. This could work too.

What is property? Property is theft.