i cannot imagine something less productive than going around shopping for useless definitions that aren't even at issue in random literature no one is even willing to speak up for as compelling
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime
i have already defined my terms. i introduced substance causation for you, i introduced an example of how it could contrast with event casuation, i then said how this can be shaped by introducing a causal powers view, and then applied it 'higher level entities' like sapient
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @gabrielamadej
you have defined... some terms? sort of? in this edifice you have built, what does free will consist of?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime
interesting how you dishonestly subthreaded this to re-apply a question already answered
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gabrielamadej
you're really leaning on this "dishonesty" gotcha aren't you like, i guess it doesn't matter to you if it's bullshit if you think it might manipulate me was this answer already given the "i can't answer that" answer? because um
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime
your question has multiple answers on the view i already have defined. it could be applied to a transcendental subject of experience causally dependent on lower-level monistic/"physical" materials to operate but not independent from them in either properties or substance
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gabrielamadej @chaosprime
that would be an example of a non-reductive physicalist way to subsume and describe the character of the agents who already have, much like the substances in the broader ontology already described, the causal power to make free decisions based on their own judgemnets.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gabrielamadej @chaosprime
the freedom is already gained and inheirted because now there is no rigid chain of causality nor anything like a principle of sufficient reason commanding, in any way that undermines any view of freedom in action, that *could* otherwise makes their causal power not their own
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gabrielamadej @chaosprime
you could apply this to a cartesian substance dualist version of an agent, a non-cartesian substance dualist version of an agent (e.g. e.j. lowe). you could deny selfhood itself and just repackage it under the appropriate semantics.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gabrielamadej @chaosprime
if nuance and knowing there are multiple ways to answer a generalized question based on already stipulated conditions (which are already controversial and posited 'just as an example') is "dancing around the issue" and not "giving definitions" to you--you have an engineer's mind
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
i absolutely have an engineer's mind. it is a delight to me that you contrive to state that in a fashion implying that i should apologize for itpic.twitter.com/yUnR4Qr23L
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime @gabrielamadej
If an engineer were capable of writing fine poetry wouldn't that make them a poet?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
If a poet were capable of building a fine bridge wouldn't that make them an engineer?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.