Even if they have no materiality? I am hoping James is about to explain this in terms I can understand.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
There are multiple ontological ways for things to exist. Mass "exists" as a property, for instance, even though it's just a description.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @HPluckrose
What I see in args using platonism to argue for dualism is an attempt to bait and switch between these different types of "existence"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29
Well, ideas and concepts are on a different plane to brains which come up with them & environments which provide them but so what?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29
I'm not sure why the existence of concepts which work is significant to the argument abt whether there needs to be more than brains & things
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @Intrinsic29
It's what I've been trying to argue too but when the conversation goes into the realms of maths, I can't know if it still works.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @Intrinsic29
So I am hoping that Christian and James will now argue about this in terms I can understand so I can get some idea whether it does!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I think you'll find that arguments against physicalism are largely manufactured complexity in general. The whole pt is to confuse you.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @HPluckrose
Not saying Christian is trying to confuse you. I think it's more likely he's read that manufactured complexity and is buying into it some.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Ah! Maybe then. I tend to put a lot of confidence in his thinking.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.