Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-02-2017, 02:23 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 12:56 PM)Naielis Wrote:  But I do tend to be quite strict with definitions and consistent usage of definitions within a given conversation.

Snort.
If you don't say so yourself.
You arrogant little twit.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
09-02-2017, 04:19 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
N.

I am curious. Which philosophers have you studied?

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2017, 05:02 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 07:21 AM)Naielis Wrote:  And science doesn't operate on self-correction for new data.

Laughat Heeheeheeheehee! Já, riiiight...

Quote:Again, you cannot use skepticism. It isn't a tool to be used. It's not synonymous with doubt or suspicion. It's a complete system.

I *am* using it, so your assertion is without merit.

Quote:All beliefs need grounding.

I feel no need for grounded beliefs. Again, your assertion is without merit.

Quote: Well it's great that you don't care about reality...

You are a liar. I have repeatedly stated that I care passionately about reality. If your philosophy cannot prevent you from misrepresenting the views of other people, it's useless.

I'm sorry, but your beliefs are much too silly to take seriously. Got anything else we can discuss?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Astreja's post
09-02-2017, 06:11 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 11:32 AM)Naielis Wrote:  
(09-02-2017 11:27 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Bolding mine.


Please read before responding.

You do not understand what skepticism actually leads us to conclude about the existence of other objects, because your grasp of semantics is poor. This leads you to argue that skepticism necessarily leads to a position functionally indistinguishable from solipsism, when this is not the case.

You do not understand semantics, skepticism, or materialism well enough to make the arguments you are attempting to.

No skepticism is an epistemology centered around doubt. Solipsism is the belief that no other minds exist. Skepticism can lead to solipsism but I never said or implied they were identical. I posted the links so you would understand how I'm defining them. And I understand materialism very well.

You do not get to dictate how words are used by others.

Skepticism may or may not be an epistemology, but to an actual scientist skepticism is merely one tool in the toolbox, it is not the toolbox.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
09-02-2017, 06:19 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 12:36 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(09-02-2017 12:21 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  When an audio engineer designs a speaker with a vibrating membrane and a box around it, and a huge magnet and a coil, when he designs that speaker to create well directed waves of pressure that propagate through a room full of air, how does he (accidentally?) include the transportation of your "not material" *feeling* that a brain has when listening to this music? What is it and how is it transported from the speaker to the ear?

This is an awesome question. It gets at which type of dualism is preferable. The immaterial aspect of the waves is not present when the engineer builds the speaker. It's contained within the wave. Information can be contained in the physical (some dualists would say it must be contained in the physical) but understood or interpreted in the aphysical and by aphysical means. It has two components. It has it's physical properties and it has it's content/ meaning. The same goes for a line of code or a word being written on a page. The immaterial is not transported physically in the wave. It's a property of the wave itself.

Quote:Please tell me, i am all ears, and i bet all the hundreds of software and hardware engineers, as well as mechanical engineers at my office will be literally excited by the breaking news i am going to report after you enlightened me (and everyone else on TTA).

Well it has nothing to do with the engineer. The engineer didn't author the immaterial aspect of the wave. That was the author of the music.

That position is incoherent and is utterly unsupported by any evidence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
09-02-2017, 06:21 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 12:40 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(09-02-2017 11:40 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  You demonstrably do not, because you consistently fail to understand what it says about minds. You instead post things like "liking one type of music over another implies dualism", or "materialism cannot deal with the existence of minds", and so on.

You can say that you understand these things all you like, but your responses continually show this to not be the case. And there is nothing wrong with this - showing an interest in things you do not understand is a good thing - but you need to stop assuming that you already understand things when the people who actually study them are continually forced to correct you.

"There are also many familiar objections to both materialism and dualism. For example, it is often said that materialism cannot truly explain just how or why some brain states are conscious, and that there is an important “explanatory gap” between mind and matter. On the other hand, dualism faces the problem of explaining how a non-physical substance or mental state can causally interact with the physical body."
Source: http://www.iep.utm.edu/consciou/

We do not yet have a good explanation for consciousness, but all of the results of neuroscience support a solely physical explanation.

There is no evidence of a ghost in the machine.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
09-02-2017, 06:23 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 01:06 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(09-02-2017 12:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  17 YOs "lecturing" at people, is hilarious. Facepalm
You are UNQUALIFIED.

LMFAO.

It's only hilarious if you're an arrogant person who thinks ad homs will win him arguments.

He is not using ad hominems to win an argument. They are simply his opinions of you. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
09-02-2017, 06:58 PM (This post was last modified: 09-02-2017 07:06 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 12:36 PM)Naielis Wrote:  This is an awesome question. It gets at which type of dualism is preferable. The immaterial aspect of the waves is not present when the engineer builds the speaker. It's contained within the wave. Information can be contained in the physical (some dualists would say it must be contained in the physical) but understood or interpreted in the aphysical and by aphysical means. It has two components. It has it's physical properties and it has it's content/ meaning. The same goes for a line of code or a word being written on a page. The immaterial is not transported physically in the wave. It's a property of the wave itself.


Well it has nothing to do with the engineer. The engineer didn't author the immaterial aspect of the wave. That was the author of the music.

Quote:That position is incoherent and is utterly unsupported by any evidence.

There is no "content/meaning" beyond the actual wave. He has not a shred of evidence for that nonsense. Everyone interprets music differently. The sound enters the human auditory receptors and get interpreted (differently IN EVERY CASE), by the human hearing and interpreting the sound waves. There is not a shred of evidence for any "dualistic immaterial" aspect of sound waves, and NO SCIENTIST says there is. It's simply made up woo.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
09-02-2017, 07:14 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 12:40 PM)Naielis Wrote:  For example, it is often said that materialism cannot truly explain just how or why some brain states are conscious, and that there is an important “explanatory gap” between mind and matter.

Neuro-scientists never say that. Who are you even talking about ?
More unsupported ASSertions.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2017, 08:19 PM
RE: Skepticism is a Problem for the Pragmatist
(09-02-2017 06:58 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is no "content/meaning" beyond the actual wave. He has not a shred of evidence for that nonsense. Everyone interprets music differently. The sound enters the human auditory receptors and get interpreted (differently IN EVERY CASE), by the human hearing and interpreting the sound waves.

Exactly.

Meaning comes from the observer, not the thing being observed.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: