Philosophy Now Forum

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 1:44 pm No, I don't at all think that this implies a lack of credibility. If we're talking about stuff that only exists as personal opinions, beliefs, feelings, etc. then that's no knock against that stuff. That's simply a fact about it. It's the nature of the stuff in question.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 5:42 am

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 1:44 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 5:28 am But note you have insisting my views are based on personal opinions, beliefs, feeling, etc., implying lack of credibility.

No, I don't at all think that this implies a lack of credibility. If we're talking about stuff that only exists as personal opinions, beliefs, feelings, etc. then that's no knock against that stuff. That's simply a fact about it. It's the nature of the stuff in question.

Whatever are personal opinions, beliefs, feeling, etc. cannot be fact until they are verified and justified empirically and philosophically within a credible FSK.

Note Kant continuum of what is fact;

• 1. Personal opinion = high subjectivity not verified nor justified.
  
  2. Belief = lower subjectivity, reasonable objectivity as verified and justified by self only,
  
  3. Fact or knowledge = no personal subjectivity, verified and justified within a credible FSK.

The most one can say with 1 & 2 is it a fact the person is having a personal opinion and belief, but,
2 can only be a fact when personal belief is verified and justified within a credible FSK.

This is common with scientific fact/truth/knowledge where the individual scientist has a hunch or intuition of a possible truth.
He then set about proving to himself and justifying it is true with his highest personal conviction.
But it can only be a scientific fact when it is processed within the scientific FSK.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 8:28 am

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Mon Mar 01, 2021 1:44 pm No, I don't at all think that this implies a lack of credibility. If we're talking about stuff that only exists as personal opinions, beliefs, feelings, etc. then that's no knock against that stuff. That's simply a fact about it. It's the nature of the stuff in question.

Then why are you emphasising the "only exists"?

Everything that exists "only exists" as it exists. Your statement applies broadly and to everything, yet you've chosen to use it narrowly.

Why? Sure seems you are prejudiced.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 1:55 pm To stress that the phenomena in question exist in no other location; they exist in no other location, in no other manner.

It would be like saying, "If we're talking about stuff that only exists on the Earth . . ." Otherwise someone might think, "Well, that stuff might exist on the Earth, but it also exists on other planets." For example, if we were talking about Ornithorhynchidae (platypus are the only currently living example). This would in no way suggest that we're somehow devaluing Ornithorhynchidae just because they only exist on Earth.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:01 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 1:55 pm To stress that the phenomena in question exist in no other location; they exist in no other location, in no other manner.

It would be like saying, "If we're talking about stuff that only exists on the Earth . . ." Otherwise someone might think, "Well, that stuff might exist on the Earth, but it also exists on other planets." For example, if we were talking about Ornithorhynchidae (platypus are the only currently living example). This would in no way suggest that we're somehow devaluing Ornithorhynchidae just because they only exist on Earth.

Again... That is true for all phenomena. They exist at the location that they exist.

So what?

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:02 pm So, for example, poles do not only exist on Earth, do they?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:04 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:02 pm So, for example, poles do not only exist on Earth, do they?

They exist in the universe. Like everything else.

So what?

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:06 pm So some things exist both on the Earth and elsewhere, but some things only exist on Earth. Saying that something only exists on Earth isn't a knock on that thing's "credibility," it's not an implied devaluing of that thing, etc.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:07 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:06 pm So some things exist both on the Earth and elsewhere, but some things only exist on Earth. Saying that something only exists on Earth isn't a knock on that thing's "credibility," it's not an implied devaluing of that thing, etc.

OK. Then what is the point of your point?

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:09 pm The point is to disagree with the charge that something is being condemned or dreaded etc. if it only exists as a particular thing, only in a particular location, etc.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:14 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:09 pm The point is to disagree with the charge that something is being condemned or dreaded etc. if it only exists as a particular thing, only in a particular location, etc.

So you are still not addressing my point.

Given these two styles of expression:

Style A: A particular things only exists at a particular location.
Style B: A particular things only exists at a particular location.

Note the italics in Style B (and the absence thereof in style A).

What is the significance of the emphasis?

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:17 pm We're in the midst of a subjective/objective discussion (see the thread title etc.), and I'm going back and forth with a guy who is insisting that an only-in-location-x phenomenon is NOT only in location x.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:18 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:17 pm We're in the midst of a subjective/objective discussion (see the thread title etc.), and I'm going back and forth with a guy who is insisting that an only-in-location-x phenomenon is NOT only in location x.

Correct. Morality is in multiple locations.

My head, your head, everybody's heads.

Which is why I asked you why you are using the word "only".

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:19 pm Only in heads.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:20 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:19 pm Only in heads.

And phenomena exist only in universes.

So what is the point of your point?