@Humanisticus @PhilosophyExp I guess he's assuming that it is though - and wouldn't it be defensible given that assumption?
-
-
Replying to @SIN_Notung
@SIN_Notung@PhilosophyExp No. You could defend him but not the argument, his statement is not defensible.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Humanisticus
@Humanisticus@PhilosophyExp but given the assumption?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SIN_Notung
@SIN_Notung@PhilosophyExp No. A false assumption doesn't bolster an argument.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Humanisticus
@Humanisticus@PhilosophyExp it can still be a valid argument though, even with false premises...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SIN_Notung2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
-
Replying to @Humanisticus
@Humanisticus@PhilosophyExp well in philosophy "validity" is usually just when the conclusion follows from premises, not necessarily true2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SIN_Notung
@SIN_Notung@PhilosophyExp Well from a factual standpoint, it's an indefensible position.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Humanisticus
@Humanisticus@SIN_Notung It clearly isn't indefensible, since I'm defending it, and I don't think you're doing particularly well! :)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp@SIN_Notung Well the holocaust is defensible if you want to get pedantic about it.5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@Humanisticus @SIN_Notung merely an academic exercise, even it it turns out that you're right (& you might well be right).
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.