If I were to have a dream in which I was flying like Superman, it would be a fact that I had the dream, but not that I was flying like Superman. — aletheist

Not true, In the dream, you were flying like superman...

True propositions really do represent facts. — aletheist

Really do? True propositions really do represent the actual state of affairs? Is that more succinct?

Language itself is a system of signs, a means of representation. — aletheist

Representation of what, then?

What do you mean by “art of morality”? — DingoJones

Quality post, btw. I mean by that to say that a person is possessed with a certain conception of morality and they then being or spewing falsely derived synthetic a posteriori conclusions about moral behavior in life.

That's what I think I meant...

I do not understand this question. Facts are not signs that represent something else; as we established previously, they are real states of affairs. — aletheist

Again, you use 'real' here again. Why is that?

Facts represent things in the world. What's this "representation" thing doing here in language?

I think the burden should not be on the OP so much as the people responding. You should clarify what someone means before trying to counter-argue or engage with them. — DingoJones

Yes; but, a straw man can only be formed based on false assumptions or premises.

I suppose its the responsibility for all parties, but I observe that people are more careful in their OP than people are to respond to them. — DingoJones

Yes, I hope so too; but, that's not the impression I get when I see religious discussions or posts dedicated to the art of morality.

They care less about what the person is trying to say and much more about picking out things they can use to bolster thier own pre-existing position or (one that particularly annoys me) to use what they can in the OP to twist the intended topic to one of thier own pet opinions. — DingoJones

I think that often happens with posts about religion. You do see that sort of stuff in topics about the philosophy of language.

JohnyFive — Posty McPostface

He even posted on these forums; but, I can't find his nick? I guess he was removed from the forum for some reason.

It's easier to communicate online for some because of social limitations, anxiety, fear of rejection, and embarrassment to name a few. That's why online dating is so popular. — Hanover

I guess you can make a straw man and say that the internet is composed of such individuals. I certainly would fall into that category you are describing though. To each his own?

Unfortunately, the whole field seems to be is a comedy of errors, self-deception, and plain deception. — Pierre-Normand

Really? You can visit that forum, specifically "Atom Ecology" along with "MacGyver (aka JohnyFive) LENR experiment", and see that that forum consists of well qualified and sincere individuals. They are on another level than me. So, I'm not qualified to describe their results.

See: https://www.lenr-forum.com/ — Posty McPostface

I post there under the guise known as "Promethian". I welcome any members from here, there.

What is not true? Rossi's involvement with LENR is his latest scam. But I was talking about Rossi's previous scam, marketed by his firm Leonardo Technologies, Inc., when he falsely claimed to have achieved 20% efficiency with thermoelectric generators. But the devices were actually generating 1 watt rather than 1 kW. — Pierre-Normand

I agree that Rossi is not the ideal candidate to provide for the legitimacy of the LENR field. But, phrasing him as the sole failure if the entire field that is LENR, is a gross overgeneralization.

There's a forum dedicated to LENR where different individuals report success in making a configuration of hydrogen-nickel mixtures into devices that either emit radiation or produce excess heat.

See: https://www.lenr-forum.com/

I don't understand that. If a proposition differs from a fact only by the fact that it might or might not be one, or if a proposition is what purports to be a fact, then there's nothing about that that says that a proposition can't be definitely true or definitely false. ...might definitely be a fact or definitely not be a fact. — Michael Ossipoff

So, facts are independent of the Principle of Bipolarity? I don't know.

It is not a fact, it is a proposition; and it is not a true proposition, since it does not refer to a real object - there is no present King of France - so it does not even represent a fact. It merely purports to represent a fact, as all propositions do. — aletheist

Hence, what do facts represent?

As stated, the amount of gamma radiation should've killed him. — Benkei

LENR doesn't necessarily product radiation in some circumstances. Gamma radiation has been reported by some people in different configurations of their LENR devices.

I don't think this is a rebuttal of Rossi... This simply takes a piece of evidence and generalizes for more than one individual, which is overgeneralizing.

What are the chances, anyway, that sustainable nuclear fusion would be achieve by a lifelong scam artist who doesn't have a degree in any scientific field whatsoever? — Pierre-Normand

That's a straw man and you know it...

He then invented a magical device to convert waste heat into usable electric power (the laws of thermodynamics be damned). His devices were independently tested to only delivered 0.1% of the advertised power. Nuclear fusion just is his latest scam. — Pierre-Normand

Not true. I've been following the advent of LENR for 4 years now, and more and more people are reporting excess heat and commence viable product that can be derived from this technology. Some people have been following this technology since Pons and Fleischmann first released their product to the scientific community that we're unable to reproduce their results.

So, should it be a moderator's role to ask anyone starting a new topic to state their definitions clearly to avoid ambiguity and vagueness resulting in potential straw man's and such?

The real is that which is as it is regardless of what anyone thinks about it. — aletheist

So facts are mind-independent? I thought they were mind-dependent...

The present Kind of France is bald, is a fact that doesn't correspond to reality. What can you say about that>?

Can a Negative thought cause bodily infirmity. What is happening in a mind-body interaction? I made a thread once about whether pain was a warning that something was unhealthy in society as well as one's self. — Andrew4Handel

Interesting question. The mind-body dualism comes apart when dealing with depression.

So, mind-body are same.

No, a fact is a real state of affairs, which a true proposition represents. — aletheist

What's a "real state of affairs'?

Look no further than here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4290/principle-of-bipolarity

This is backwards; a fact does not represent anything. — aletheist

A fact represents a state of affairs, no?

So, facts are immune to the Principle of Bipolarity?

Further confusing/adding difficulty to these online discussions is intellectually dishonest definitions, meant to purposely skew the available responses. — DingoJones

I agree and think that much confusion or ambiguity would be avoided if people stated their premises and conclusions more clearly by introducing a stipulative definition. I mean to say that it would be more useful if people stated clearly the stipulative definitions they use.

I understand that some people might even be unaware that they are using a definition in a stipulative manner, therefore there's nothing that can be done in that regard other than recognizing that a person is using a stipulative definition and expressing that to the OP or person posting a new topic.

Online, there are conversations already going on, and it's a whole other environment that invites everyone's contribution. — Michael Ossipoff

Yes, that environment interests me. What can you say about it?

People often say that non-verbal communication is at least 60-80% of real communication... Does that make online communication a futile effort? What kind of communication is online communication, then?

I'm not sure the meaning of humanistic to you.
If you mean that because philosophy is practiced/followed/thought of by humans only, that it is, in effect, humanistic, then I don't understand you. — Caldwell

Well, philosophy in education is classified as a pure humanistic art. What can I say more?

A fact is that which is represented by a true proposition. — aletheist

What about a false proposition? Is that possible for a fact to represent a false proposition?

Then, there's no need to speak of a fact "obtaining", which would be redundant, because there's no such thing as a non-obtaining fact. — Michael Ossipoff

The Principle of Bipolarity would contradict this conclusion.

Are you asking how one thing comes be positioned relative to another? — Michael

Yes, I suppose you can phrase it so.

My hesitation in exploring the extent of and cause of his social limitations is based upon my acknowledgment that it is impossible to psychoanalyze others from afar, especially those with a complex history of mental illness.. — Hanover

Yet, your attempts to psychoanalyze me in this thread belies your intent to psychoanalyze. Anyway, I don't care if you do try and psychoanalyze me or not. That doesn't bug me.

But, if you read my most enlightening posts, I did question whether Posty McPostface was a misanthrope, saying that his outreach here belied (BAM!) his claims to misanthropy. — Hanover

I admit, that I am not a classical misanthrope. Rather stipulatively I use this word. If you find that vague, then I will say that I do interact with people online much more than in real life. That indicates that I feel more comfortable with online interactions than the small chit chat I would do with people in real life.

But, that's not indicative of misanthropy per se. It's rather the fact that I can effectively find more people online that share my common interests. And hence I post here. So, your assumption that my posts belie my stipulative misanthropy, is ill-founded.

What more can I say about this straw man you've created of me?

:blush:

Rossi has a customer for 40MW of his product. Let's wait and see if he can deliver on his promise.

Night Sam... — creativesoul

Same, just not time yet.

So, where did we leave off?

Sorry, I'm not educated enough to give you a definitive answer.

You've lost me there. — Caldwell

I mean to imply that philosophy which is deeply humanistic, had some conception of man or woman. Nietzsche thought so and some people followed in his steps. How has the conception of an ideal man or woman evolved over time?

This is a philosophy forum afterall. Posty acknowledged his motivation was only to find kindred spirits who could identify with his plight, which simply means I don't satisfy his criteria in this thread. — Hanover

The antecedent belies your claim. Since this is a philosophy forum which can consist with kids who score on the above range of intelligence, I mean genius level, then this is an open platform where we exchange ideas. I was hoping someone else might have an idea similar or better refined than my own conception of some manner or form.

How did you obtain this post? — VagabondSpectre

That's the mystical part! No?

Solipsistic view does not need to be negative, although common sense is gonna get you.

Maybe you're just cynical? — Caldwell

Is that the end result of the attitude that a philosopher ought to be is cynicism? If that's not true then, what ideal for a man or woman ought to be?

Same here.

It's a little early, so might have to wait until I can rest.

It's 8:17 here in Cali.

Sorry, I don't understand your point. — Sam26

And we're at ground zero.

The future of humanity, of civilization, causes you great distress? — Caldwell

The future that I can picture in as a solipsistic mind is self-defeating and negative.The solipsism constantly must always wonder that she can think whether she is solipsistic or not.

This reminds me of the arguments you see online about synthetic a priori truths exist or not.