(Untitled)

[dzlk]

The thing about doing routine housekeeping on the "Manage Message Settings" page is that, speaking as a philosopher with a particular interest in the nature of the relationship of logical to metaphysical possibility, I actually really do want to be notified if "someone comments on a deleted entry in some_community".

Because that would change everything forever

Comments

[anosognosia]

:D

Maybe logic is an essentially linguistic phenomenon and coheres with metaphysical possibility in the mediated sense that the logically impossible is nonsense. :/

[dzlk]

Maybe logic is an essentially linguistic phenomenon and coheres with metaphysical possibility in the mediated sense that the logically impossible is nonsense.

Where I'm at lately is that I think that is the case, but as soon as you try to spell out what nonsense is and what it isn't, you can't help but start weaving an implicit metaphysics into the definition somewhere. So the linguistic turn is a full circle.

Where one ought to go on completing it, I dunno yet.

[anosognosia]

I wonder if the solution can be found in turning to questions of methodological underpinnings of knowledge claims

[dzlk]

The fundamental arguments for materialism and its brethren are typically a priori and take a form like: neuroscience theorizes mind in terms of neural states, neuroscience has some successes in theorizing mind in terms of neural state, neuroscience can extend those successes, then an ideal neuroscience explains mind per se in terms of neural states, then mind per se is neural states.

And that argument is already impaled on Hempel's dilemma, but I think that shows Hempel's dilemma is a compelling demonstration that bad things happen when a limit concept defining what can be known about a thing by this method is misappropriated as a full account of what the thing is. To say that an ideal physics must be a physics that explains why I like blackberries, oppose imperialism and avoid premature optimization is to make an unreasonable demand, therefore a proof that current physics doesn't explain these things and can't isn't a proof that current physics is incomplete, only that physics is incomplete or a special science

[pastorlenny]

Your place in history is already secure.

[dzlk]

Probably, but I must say that "securely submerged in a vast sea of anonymous, ordinary humanity" wasn't exactly my first choice. :)

That said, it turns out it's not as terrible a thing as one might have expected.

[pastorlenny]

Oh, get over it. <3