On 14 May 2013, at 22:26, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/14/2013 1:18 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 14 May 2013, at 21:45, meekerdb wrote:
They have the special status of being humans.
Sure, like termites have the special status of being termites.
And we could define a word "termiticial" to denote things made by
termites. So what's the problem?
There is no problem. I am just saying "artificial" is an indexical. It
refers to human implicitly.
If you are dualist and
anthropomorphic, then you can absolutize the distinction (but
seems ad hoc to me).
I don't see what is has to do with dualism. If you can
distinguish "humans" from "not-humans" then you can distinguish
"made by humans" from "not made by humans". It's as scientific as
any concept: table, chair, tiger, star, amoeba,...
If you can distinguish "termites" from "not-termites" then you can
distinguish "made by termites" from "not made by termites".
All I say is that "artificial" is relative to the choice of a
particular animal among the animal. The humans. Us.
So it doesn't have anything to do with dualism.
I was saying that it is so for someone which absolutizes the
difference natural/artificial, like if it was not an indexical. In
that case it singles out the human perspective from all others, and
that entails a dualism or a duality between the human perspective and
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.