Philosophy Now Forum

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:37 pm Yeah, that was the question, whether you were a computer. Well done.

*sigh*

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:35 pm How about "computer"? Your computer is a computer, but your neighbor's computer (from his perspective) is something else from your perspective?

How about "morality"? Your morality is morality, but your neighbour's morality (from his perspective) is something else from your perspective?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:38 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:37 pm Yeah, that was the question, whether you were a computer. Well done.

*sigh*

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:35 pm How about "computer"? Your computer is a computer, but your neighbor's computer (from his perspective) is something else from your perspective?

How about "morality"? Your morality is morality, but your neighbour's morality (from his perspective) is something else from your perspective?

"Morality" isn't indexical. Your neighbor's morality is still morality.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:39 pm "Morality" isn't indexical. Your neighbor's morality is still morality.

How about "perspective"? Your perspective is a perspective, but your neighbor's perspective (from his perspective) is something else from your perspective?

How about "indexicality"? Your indexicality is indexical, but your neighbor's indexicality (from his perspective) is something else from your indexicality?

Silly essentialist. Your rejection of the identity axiom is lip service.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:41 pm Silly essentialist. Your rejection of the identity axiom is lip service.

??

No idea what the heck you're thinking with either part of that. Especially "My rejection of the identity axiom"??

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:45 pm No idea what the heck you're thinking with either part of that. Especially "My rejection of the identity axiom"??

It shows...

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:46 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:45 pm No idea what the heck you're thinking with either part of that. Especially "My rejection of the identity axiom"??

It shows...

Good conversation.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:46 pm Good conversation.

Maybe.

Is "conversation" indexical or non-indexical?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:47 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:46 pm Good conversation.

Maybe.

Is "conversation" indexical or non-indexical?

So what did you gain from all of this nonsense?

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:48 pm So what did you gain from all of this nonsense?

Fuckall.

Because you failed to answer my actual question: "What is the point of your point?"

That was the only thing left to learn. That is why I asked what I asked.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:55 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:48 pm So what did you gain from all of this nonsense?

Fuckall.

Because you failed to answer my actual question: "What is the point of your point?"

That was the only thing left to learn. That is why I asked what I asked.

Again I answered that, and then you quickly went to insisting that I was saying (or that I must say) that subjective/objective are indexical. They're not. They're just location terms. "Subjective" refers to mental (a subset of the brains of persons) phenomena. It doesn't matter whose brain.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:02 pm Again I answered that, and then you quickly went to insisting that I was saying (or that I must say) that subjective/objective are indexical.

You don't have to say it. But it's true.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:02 pm They're not. They're just location terms. "Subjective" refers to mental (a subset of the brains of persons) phenomena. It doesn't matter whose brain.

All locations are locations in a monist metaphysic. To pluralise/categorize/classify them into "subjective locations" and "objective locations" you need a ......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_rule

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:10 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:02 pm Again I answered that, and then you quickly went to insisting that I was saying (or that I must say) that subjective/objective are indexical.

You don't have to say it. But it's true.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:02 pm They're not. They're just location terms. "Subjective" refers to mental (a subset of the brains of persons) phenomena. It doesn't matter whose brain.

All locations are locations in a monist metaphysic. To pluralise/categorize/classify them into "subjective locations" and "objective locations" you need a ......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_rule

There are brains, and there are things that aren't brains. We can have a term to refer to (the locations of) brains.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:13 pm There are brains, and there are things that aren't brains. We can have a term to refer to (the location of) brains.

Rinse. Repeat.

There are things (monism).
There are brain things, and non-brain things (pluralism).

What is the purpose of the distinction? What is the point of your point?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:14 pm There are things (monism).
There are brain things, and non-brain things (pluralism).

This makes no sense to me, but it probably doesn't matter:

What is the purpose of the distinction? What is the point of your point?

The purpose is that some phenomena only occur in brains, and some people claim that those phenomena occur elsewhere (only, or too).

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:16 pm The purpose is that some phenomena only occur in brains, and some people claim that those phenomena occur elsewhere (only, or too).

You are saying the same shit in different words.

Yes. some phenomena only occur at some locations and not other locations.

Like the phenomenon of "life". It only occurs at some parts of the universe and not others.

So what?