On 01 Jul 2015, at 21:10, Terren Suydam wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 1:43 PM, John Clark <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Terren Suydam <[email protected]
> wrote:
> the step 3 argument I and others are making is a lot easier
to defend than your position,
It's very easy to defend as long as lots and lots of personal
pronouns are used, they're a wonderful dumping ground for sloppy
thinking.
>> Case #1: Nobody, absolutely nobody can observe more
than one Terren Suydam, not even Terren Suydam.
Case #2: Everybody, absolutely everybody can observe an unlimited
number of Terren Suydams, including Terren Suydam.
Coherently explain how these 2 cases are equivalent and Terren
Suydam has won the argument and John Clark will change John Clark's
ideas on the subject.
> I've already agreed that the two scenarios are not equivalent
from the third-person perspective, but they are equivalent from the
first-person perspective.
In case #1 Terren Suydam can find only one person who has
the right to be called Terren Suydam, in case #2 Terren
Suydam can find an unlimited number of people who have an equal
right to be called Terren Suydam. How are these 2 cases equivalent
to Terren Suydam? And if that isn't "the first-person
perspective" what is?
I don't see how you can feel entitled to berate people about the use
of personal pronouns if you are confused on the difference between
the first-person perspective, and descriptions of the first-person
perspective.
Exactly. JC seems to persist in confusing the 1-views and the 3-1
view, which is exactly that: the difference between the content of
each first person experience, and the description of the locus of
those first person experience by an outsider.
Like I said once, John Clark go out of his body to reason on this in
the 3p way, which is good, but fail to reintegrate its (many) bodies
after, and thus avoid answering to the question. he pretend that he
survives, but fail to appreciate that he can only feel to survive in
one place.
He want "you" to be ambiguous, just to avoid the 1p-indeterminacy. But
we have agreed on the notion of personal identity, so "you" is not
ambiguous at all: we must read all 1-diaries produced, and *all*
confirms that the 1-view are unique, in front on one door and one city.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
