Which moral belief. I say we begin with the universally formed and/or re-formed ones... You know, the ones we all have? Point of view invariant.
— creativesoul
OK. Good place to start... I’d be interested in what you think a possible universal moral belief would be... — Mww
It is logically impossible to name anything whatsoever from a particular, re: my innate idea of a moral belief, to a universal, re: my innate idea of a moral belief residing in every similar agency, and have sufficient means to prove such must be the case. — Mww
If coming to terms with everything necessarily involves common language use, how did we come to terms with common language... — Mww
...my innate idea of a moral belief... — Mww
Fair enough I suppose, but I can't see what the "point in agreement with Hume" that Russell made has to do with the nature of truth or determinism. If it's an abstruse association you are making, then further explanation may help. — Janus
Are you denying knowledge of pre and/or non-linguistic thought/belief? — creativesoul
Are you denying the actual distinction between thought/belief and thinking about thought/belief? — creativesoul
It is logically impossible to name anything whatsoever from a particular, re: my innate idea of a moral belief, to a universal, re: my innate idea of a moral belief residing in every similar agency, and have sufficient means to prove such must be the case.
— Mww
What are you talking about? — creativesoul
What are you talking about? — creativesoul
We named it. — creativesoul
that which existed in it's entirety — creativesoul
WHAT did we name? — Mww
WHAT existed? — Mww
I’d be interested in what you think a possible universal moral belief would be...
— Mww
Thought/belief about unacceptable/acceptable behavior that grounds all morality. — creativesoul
Are you denying knowledge of pre and/or non-linguistic thought/belief?
— creativesoul
Yes. Nobody knows how what appears to be mind comes from what the brain does. — Mww
Are you denying the actual distinction between thought/belief and thinking about thought/belief?
— creativesoul
Yes. I’ve said before, to me they are the same thing. Or, I see no good reason to think they are not the same thing, and I get no help from you as means for granting the distinction. — Mww
What are you talking about?
— creativesoul
He who says it first usually says it best:
“....When they propose to establish the universal from the particulars by means of induction, they will effect this by a review of either all or some of the particulars. But if they review some, the induction will be insecure, since some of the particulars omitted in the induction may contravene the universal; while if they are to review all, they will be toiling at the impossible, since the particulars are infinite and indefinite....”
(Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism)
I’m both surprised and disappointed you failed to connect your point-of-view invariant universal moral belief to my counter-argument against it. You must have failed to connect because you asked what I was talking about, instead of showing what I was talking about is wrong, or at least does not apply. — Mww
Nobody knows how what appears to be mind comes from what the brain does.
— Mww
Do you know what everyone knows? — creativesoul
Are your thought/belief about Empiricus' the same as Empiricus'? — creativesoul
Show me the black swan. — creativesoul
is based on thinking that our knowing or believing does have some bearing or purchase on truth, which is the basis of pragmatism.If a statement about what will happen has a truth-value, could we ever know what it is, prior to the event? — S
We are addressing only the logic of our own thinking about truth. And the logic of our thinking about truth tells us that a statement about the future which it seems must become true or false one day, for example "The Sun will go nova in 2 billion years" may or may not be true now. That just is "making sense of it all" as best we can, as far as I can tell anyway. I think the "How could we know that to be the case" has already been ruled out as irrelevant in this thinking of truth as being independent of our knowing or believing. — Janus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.