Comments

  • A quandary: How do we know there isn’t anything beyond our reality?
    That's true. But the fact that the existence of the statement that Mount Everest is 29,000 ft high depends on human beings, does not show that the existence of Mount Everest depends on human beings at all. De re and de dicto. — Ludwig V
    Thank you.
  • A quandary: How do we know there isn’t anything beyond our reality?
    The semantic model does not commit us to the existence of its content. But if the actual world is affirmed to be a part of that semantic model, as you and others here continue to insist, then this is contrary to realism which assumes that the actual world is independent from any semantic model. — Metaphysician Undercover
    As if we could not talk about the actual world.

    You can't have it both ways, assert that the actual world is a part of a semantic model, with no claims to existence, and also assert that there is a real independent, existing actual world. — Metaphysician Undercover
    Because, as explained many times, it's not the semantic model that shows which possible world is actual.

    But you cannot see this. That's about you, I suppose.
  • Disability
    ↪Jamal
    A bit of a stretch, maybe. But there is a respect for persons in, say Nussbaum and Witt, both classists, that is not found in what passes for Aristotelianism in the forum; and there might be some overlap. Witt is pretty wild in some regards.




    I ran it through ChatGPT just to get an outline
    4. Where links could be drawn
    Relational flourishing:
    Witt’s Aristotelianism already sees flourishing as dependent on social structures and relationships.
    Crip theory critiques which structures are assumed “normal” or beneficial. One could interpret Crip theory as offering a critical corrective to Aristotelian flourishing: some “social goods” may harm disabled or neurodivergent people.
    Negative capability / non-identical:
    Crip theory, influenced by Adorno, highlights that some embodied or cognitive realities resist assimilation into normative categories.
    Aristotelianism could, in principle, incorporate this: flourishing might include non-normative capacities as ethically and socially valuable.
    Virtue as adaptation vs critique:
    Crip theory emphasizes structural change to enable flourishing rather than asking individuals to conform to pre-existing norms.
    This can be mapped to Aristotelian virtue ethics if virtues are reconceived not just as personal excellences but as capacities enabled by just social institutions.
    5. Key tension
    Aristotelianism tends to prescribe a “function” as a normative guide.
    Crip theory tends to deconstruct normative function, especially when it enforces ableist or exclusionary ideals.
    So the link is subtle: Witt’s Aristotelianism gives a framework for evaluating flourishing relationally, while Crip theory radicalizes the very assumptions about what counts as “flourishing” or “capacity.” The two could enter dialogue if you reconceive Aristotelian function in pluralistic or critical terms.



    That second tension, the deconstruction of normativity, is something I have time for, and outside of Aristotelian thinking.
  • Disability
    ↪frank
    Fair. We don't have your background.
  • Disability
    ↪Jamal
    There's a huge body of critical theory relating to disability. "Crip theory" in particular.

    Given the response to the pretty modest proposals in the OP, the audience here might be a bit too... shocked for a productive discussion.
  • Disability
    ↪frank
    Seems simple enough. For the staff, one grumpy patient. For the man, yet another trip to an unfamiliar space full of people who will not listen. The cumulative effect of emotional micro trauma, of having to repeat the same thing over an over. It's a common grievance for folk with disabilities.
  • Disability
    ...but I think he'd be able to eat, though he might end up with mashed potatoes on his hands. — frank
    Two things. Why should it be you making that judgement rather than him? For you to decide that him getting in a mess is OK? And what hospital is this, so I can avoid it. Sounds like the staff morale is shite.

    Added: AS in, this seems not to be an issue of disability, but of hospital management.
  • Disability
    Pardon me, but I didn't think you meant morally when you asked that question. — L'éléphant
    The presumption that a disability is a deficit does exactly that, no? Perhaps not moral - although there are those who say disability is caused by the sins of the parents - but it's at least evaluative. This is the experience of folk with disabilities.
  • Disability
    The point was to increase staff time at shift change. — frank
    In order to save them having to come back when the poor bugger couldn't eat. Call me picky, but being able to eat seems important to patient wellbeing.
  • Disability
    The study of human anatomy is where to start. — L'éléphant
    SO a statistical average? And that provides an ought here?

    Are you sure that's a good argument? How do we go from "you don't have a hand" to "You ought have a hand"?
  • Disability
    ↪frank
    Was his request unreasonable?

    He saved staff time by improving communication at the shift change.
  • A quandary: How do we know there isn’t anything beyond our reality?
    ↪Metaphysician Undercover
    Why should a semantic model commit us to the existence of the things quantified over? Your whole edifice still depends on an equivocation between what is and what is said. It's as if you were to chastise Tolkien because Hobbits are not real. nThe confusion is yours.
  • A quandary: How do we know there isn’t anything beyond our reality?
    ↪Metaphysician Undercover

    I've answered already. Several times. Here's the best I am willing to do.

    The song remains the same.
  • Transwomen are women. Transmen are men. True or false?
    ↪Janus
    Yep.
  • Transwomen are women. Transmen are men. True or false?
    ↪Janus
    If I recall correctly, @Philosophim had strong reservations concerning regret after gender-affirmation surgery. Studies I found show that regret is a factor, however at low levels, but note methodological issues. It doesn't appear to be a strong enough factor to inform policy.
  • Transwomen are women. Transmen are men. True or false?
    ↪Janus
    The presumption, in
    ↪Philosophim
    , seems to be that transitioning does not treat gender dysphoria.

    That is, from what I have seen, factually incorrect. Meta-studies are readily available to justify this position.

    Note that we have moved to empirical studies, rather then considering conceptual issues. We are no longer doing philosophy.
  • Bannings
    ↪Paine
    Only in that I'm here when I could be setting more seed trays. But I like doing both, and think I've a reasonable balance. Wife might disagree.
  • Disability
    ↪Moliere
    ,
    ↪Moliere
    yep.

    DO you find it interesting how ubiquitous and indelible the idea of deficit is?
  • Disability
    The critique of social contract dogma is particularly salient:

    People with disabilities may not be free or independent; and those with severe mental disabilities may be unequal. Nussbaum argues that such people should nevertheless be considered full citizens entitled to dignified lives, even if no one could gain from cooperating with them. She notes that the social contract tradition has always denied the reality of dependency, despite the obvious fact that everyone is dependent on others during infancy, old age, injury, and illness. Historically women have done most of the largely unpaid work of caring for dependents, so by ignoring women, the social contract theorists conveniently evaded the thorny issue of justice for dependents and caregivers. Nussbaum argues that justice for people with disabilities should include whatever special arrangements are required for them to lead a dignified life, and the work of caring for them should be socially recognized, fairly distributed, and fairly compensated. — Jean Chambers
  • Disability
    ...impairments... — Moliere
    Why not just that some folk dance on their legs, others in their chair?

    Note that this removes the impairment?

    Hence, re-focus on capabilities.

    That view is expounded by Nussbaum in a discussion of disability, in Frontiers of Justice. Taht;s a link to a review you might find interesting. It's an Aristotelian approach...

    But quite unlike those Aristotelian approaches usually seen in these fora.
  • Bannings
    I know you are joking and are reflecting upon years of participation. — Paine

    ....yesss....

    ....joking....

    :fear:
  • A quandary: How do we know there isn’t anything beyond our reality?
    But I don't thoroughly understand either or metaphysical. — Ludwig V

    Good, since it is a topic of ongoing discussion. Just not much in the way @Metaphysician Undercover suggests.
  • A new home for TPF
    ↪Paine
    If there were enough interest, we might try a discussion on ChatGPT to see what happens.
  • Bannings
    ↪Paine
    @Jamal as the pusher man.

    I can quite any time I like...
  • A new home for TPF
    ↪Paine
    I was looking at the ChatGPT function that allowed group discussions. Within that discussion, a participant can openly ask the AI to explain or to find resources.

    Folk treat this as an "authority", but of course any authority here would be granted by the participants, not presumed. That is, if you disagree with the AI's response, then you could openly ask it for an alternate response, to ground your objection.

    Might this serve to excrete the bullshit from a discussion? Perhaps. It might be interesting to try.
  • Disability
    See Reframing disability
  • Disability
    It's worth noting that the notion of "disability" as a class is relatively recent.

    Osteological studies of Scottish soldiers from the Battle of Dunbar 1650, and The York 113, show that amongst the common soldiery were folk who would now be considered disabled. The presence of individuals with health stress or impairments did not exclude them from being enlisted or captured as soldiers; they were treated as ordinary foot-soldiers, and thrown into the same grave. Their impairment did not exclude them from participation in the social exercise of making war.

    Disability is not a natural kind, but a social classification, perhaps a creation of the welfare state. The historical evidence indicates that impairment alone does not create disability. Treating disability as an economic category is a recent development. Disability is like property, citizenship and marriage.

    What might stand is a re-focusing away from what is "normal" and towards accomodation, towards what folk are capable of. Variation is normal.
  • First vs Third person: Where's the mystery?
    The claim is that in order for you to be conscious of anything at all, that consciousness must have a felt quality. — hypericin

    Again, what is "having a felt quality", if not "being conscious of a feeling"?

    Have you said anything more than that being conscious is being conscious?

    Seems to me that such an approach seems profound, seems to be providing an explanation, until one looks closely.

    I would argue that qualia is the bedrock of sentience. — hypericin
    Here's the same thing again; to be sentient is to perceive or feel; and saying "qualia is the bedrock of sentience" sounds cool, as if "Ah! Now we know! it's qualia that explain consciousness!"

    But look again. Qualia are perceptions and feelings. so "qualia is the bedrock of sentience" just says "perceptions and feelings are the bedrock of sentience"...

    The feeling of having an explanation dissolves... We've just said the same thing with different words.
  • Disability
    ...as much as people perceiving another person as somehow "contributing" — Moliere

    Spot on!

    And the presumption is, as often as not, that the disabled do not contribute.

    But if you can't get up the stairs in order to pay your taxes... are you to blame?

    An example. In “False Economy: The Economic Benefits of the NDIS and the Consequences of Government Cost-Cutting" the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the main support for folk with a disability Dow Nunder, the scheme was shown to have a multiplier effect of 2.25, meaning for every dollar spent on NDIS supports, about A$ 2.25 in economic value is generated across the economy.

    Now the figure is disputed - but even if such a scheme only break even, should it not be implemented? Doesn't it make the nation better?

    And let's question the presumption of deficit.
  • A quandary: How do we know there isn’t anything beyond our reality?
    ↪Ludwig V
    Yes - that's pretty much correct. The actual world is the one we are in, and it might have been any of the possible worlds. There is no modal difference between the actual world and the other possible worlds... That'll confuse Meta no end.

    Because the difference is not modal. It's metaphysical.

    And Meta, as I've pointed out, has failed to see this distinction.
  • Disability
    ↪Outlander
    I don't understand why guilt is an appropriate response to some else's' disability. Looks to be another case of re-centring - making it about the able bodied instead of the disabled. Odd.
  • Disability
    I guess my question is what might you propose the best response to the disabled would be if there are some well intentioned faux pas occuring? — Hanover

    To listen.
  • Disability
    It’s just a plain fact that one’s capacity is diminished by his disability, so in my mind the able-bodied ought not be blamed for it. — NOS4A2

    Blamed?
  • Disability
    ↪Moliere
    Those who do not pay taxes are a burden?

    Like these companies?

    :wink:
  • Disability
    The wheelchair user is also incapacitated by being unable to dance, and that can not be ameliorated. — J

    Far from the same thing?

    So here's another thing about disability: being told what is possible by the able-bodied. Presumption. As opposed to being allowed to explore what is possible; the capabilities approach.

    Stairs take less space than ramps. Seems to be their sole advantage. The presumption is that the facilities at the top of the stair will only be used by the able bodied, or that it's up to the chair user to solve the problem.

    Yes, that is a social response. an area is made unavailable to a group of people by choice.
  • A quandary: How do we know there isn’t anything beyond our reality?
    ↪Metaphysician Undercover
    Your obsessed with definitions. I've explained what possible worlds are and how the actual wold is a possible world. If there is a problem set it out. The view I've set out it quite standard. If you see it as problematic, set out how.
  • Disability
    Thanks for your thoughtful responses. A few interesting things are happening here.

    The most obvious is the prominence of the deficit model, in various guises.

    The idea that disabilities need fixing.

    The idea that a person with a disability cannot pay their way and will require more than they could provide.

    And the related way that the focus moved so quickly from disability to care, to re-centring on the able bodied.

    Offered as something for consideration, not as a negative. Why did this happen? is it justifiable? How?
  • First vs Third person: Where's the mystery?
    duty calls. — Wayfarer

    Give her my regards... :wink:
  • First vs Third person: Where's the mystery?
    I would like to think that the sentience of beings other than human is not something for us to decide. — Wayfarer
    The applicability of the word "sentience" is something for us to decide.

    What counts as being sentient?
  • First vs Third person: Where's the mystery?
    ↪Wayfarer
    Doesn't the answer simply depend on what we count as being sentient? That is, it's something to be decided , not discovered?
Home » Banno