Philosophy Now Forum

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:51 am

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:10 pm

Advocate wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:34 pm For those of us who got here late and don't want to read 12 pages, where are we at in relation to OP?

I'm trying to get us to discuss Gewirth's argument in some detail, but can't even begin to get that task off the ground.

Skepdick is trying to entertain himself via trolling.

Point is you are imposing your off tangent views on the OP where you are merely relying on the secondary interpretation of Gewirth's from Stilley's thesis.
You should read Gewirth's paper to understand [not necessary agree] his point thoroughly so you don't have to wonder whether Gewirth stated X and P are the same or not.

I have repeatedly explained what is Gewirth's position on that matter, but it seem you are blind to it and dogmatically stuck to your off tangent position.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:05 am

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:16 pm It's not clear to me how the argument would work if X and P can't have the same extension.

It would work like any other modality/contextually.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 5:53 pm Are you not capable of even learning simple things that people say? (That is, learning and remembering that they said them?)

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:03 pm Sure, present the argument where the extension of X and P would be the same.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:38 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:03 pm Sure, present the argument where the extension of X and P would be the same.

It's the same argument. With modality.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:43 pm Yeah, but present it in full.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:48 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:43 pm Yeah, but present it in full.

Are you incapable?

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:55 pm Yes. I'm incapable. That's why I had written that it's not clear to me how it would work in that case.

So now you'll present it in full I'm sure.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:56 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:55 pm Yes. I'm incapable. That's why I had written that it's not clear to me how it would work in that case.

So now you'll present it in full I'm sure.

Looks like you are wrong.

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:57 pm Gee I never would have guessed that you'd not actually present the argument in full.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:59 pm

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:57 pm Gee I never would have guessed that you'd not actually present the argument in full.

Indeed. You are a shit scientist. Even worse at sarcasm.

Such revelation: the guy who doesn't make claims/rejects argumentation as valid mode of communication didn't present an argument.

Oh no!