Top new questions this week:
|
|
Let's assume the world is defined as everything there is. Then subjective experiences are included in the world, and they are "things".
Then each subjective experience has a point of view through ...
|
|
In The Communist Manifesto, page 331 of the 2002/2014 Penguin Edition, Marx and Engels write;
"The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the ...
|
|
Often I see atheists say they do not have an active belief in the nonexistence of God, only a lack of belief in God.
I see where they are coming from, but I have a suspicion that they're equivalent.
...
|
|
If one argues:
I have seen only white swans, therefore there are no black swans.
What would this fallacy be called?
|
|
I am feeling really confused on how we colloquially use and redefine words and sometime use the equivocation fallacy. I have fallen into equivocation language traps before, and as I become more aware ...
|
|
What does Kant mean when he says rational beings exist as an end in themselves, and never merely as a means to an end?
Immanuel Kant - From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
|
|
In the Groundwork and the second Critique, IIRC, Kant for some reason tries to explain the "argument" for the categorical imperative as synthetic a priori. He does this not just for assertoric forms ...
|
Greatest hits from previous weeks:
|
|
Medieval logicians memorized this most famous logic mnemonic:
Barbara, Celarent, Darii, Ferio ← direct first figure
Baralipton, Celantes, Dabitis, Fapesmo, Frisesomorum ← indirect first figure
...
|
|
Everyone starts out at 0 and if anyone wants to say that they know something they have to prove that claim. Is the counter to this person claiming that they know something logically correct?
...
|
|
Based on the definitions given by Wikipedia , Rule Utilitarianism and Act Utilitarianism both seems to imply the same meaning
Rule Utilitarianism
Action is right as it conforms to a rule that ...
|
|
About "If A, then B. Therefore, if not-B, then not-A":
From what I understand the conclusion is wrong, because it is not said that A is a sufficient condition for B, (and there may be other ...
|
|
Sometimes this image is used to explain what agnosticism is and how it's independent from belief:
It makes some sense but I still have confusion understanding it.
What is the difference between ...
|
|
In the infamous creation museum a strategically very shrewd exhibit, where a scientist and a biblical scholar both study the same fossils, is being presented:
The sign says
“different ...
|
|
There is the analytic/synthetic distinction and the a priori/a posteriori distinction. These two distinctions form four types of knowledge:
analytic a priori
synthetic a priori
analytic a posteriori
...
|
Can you answer these questions?
|
|
In A Nice Derangement of Epistemes by John H. Zammito, he attempts to "deflate" certain "extravagant gestures in philosophy of language" as he believes they "threaten to undermine indispensable canons ...
|
|
How does the deflationary theory of truth, which defines true and false in the following straightforward way
The proposition that p is true iff p.
The proposition that p is false iff p is not ...
|
|
Notoriously intractable, free will have had no success in being proven physically. Even phenomenally it is difficult to pin down precisely. So why do people believe each other when claiming that they ...
|
