My website!!

[Whaleboy]

Language is an essentially public phenomenon. But that's another issue.

I wouldn't agree entirely, mainly because one can also think in terms of langauge.

it isn't possible to obey a rule "privately" because there is no distinction between thinking you are following a rule and actually following a rule

But who is determining that rule? Is it not the individual, who is then of course subjective.

rules for the employment of linguistic signs

Sorry, my lack of formal philosophical training is showing now, please can you explain that one? I cant blag my way by roughly interpreting this time

In the case of snow, the position "snow is white" or "snow is black" is equally valid, but if you are viewing it in the context of "what is the colour of snow", with the obvious wildcard of the truth, then the position "snow is white" is more valid. In cases like these, indeed all cases, (I say that absolutely only in the context of relativism), the actual position and the context to which it is applied are separate entities. In objectivity, its the difference between n+1 dimensions (in context) and n dimensions (out of context).

What the relativist says is senseless because relativism undermines meaning by allowing the same proposition to be entertained as true and false at the same time by the same person

But does that necessarily make it senseless. It is considered to be true and false at the same time, but for only different contexts. The position "I am good looking" may be true for me, but I have to consider it to be false for my girlfriend point of view (all hypothetical of course ). That is because both positions are equally valid, but the two different contexts make them respectively true and false.

If you refer to out of context, then validity is equal and irrelevant, as quantifiably, it is 0.

propositions are not fallacious, only arguments are

If an argument is the application of a proposition to a certain context with wildcards to judge, then yes. Take the example of a court. Defence has one argument, plaintiff has another. Judge decides on the basis of what actually happened (wildcard). In the same court with the same positions, but the opposite wildcard, the formally fallacious argument is now true for that context.

[Whaleboy]

Go get him, Agathon. He's has lots of stamina, mind you. You'll have to sweat.

This is a debate, not a deathmatch!

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by elijah


This is a debate, not a deathmatch!

Now you tell me

[Az]

Originally posted by elijah


This is a debate, not a deathmatch!

[Makeo]

I enjoyed the link to crayola

[Whaleboy]

I enjoyed the link to crayola

[Az]

Btw, I am sorry in advance in participaiting in turning your thread into a spamfest, Elijah. You seem like a good guy,though somewhat misguided.

[Whaleboy]

Its ok Azazel, what would this world be if it were not for the misguided?

[Az]

[Asher]

Originally posted by elijah
Its ok Azazel, what would this world be if it were not for the misguided?

It'd make my life easier, because I wouldn't have to deal with people like you in the tech threads.

[Az]

[Whaleboy]

You'd like that wouldn't you Asher

Thats one area where Windows has Linux by the jugular: Website development!!

[Asher]

Originally posted by elijah
Thats one area where Windows has Linux by the jugular: Website development!!

+ ease of use + game selection + application selection + consistency + media APIs + GUI responsiveness + native GUI support.

[Whaleboy]

time and place Asher, namely, when I'm sober and on tech threads

[Asher]

Wouldn't you have to be drunk to argue that Linux is easier to use, has more game and application selection, is more consistent, has better media APIs, and has a native GUI that's more responsive?

The answer is yes. Drunk or incredibly ignorant.