Steve, I can see that dmb is the "target" of your conversation - and that there is a meta-topic here - your not-so-well-hidden agenda.
Do I "approve of" dmb's style of argumentation ? Well no - but his style is his style. In every exchange with you or him (or anyone else) I'm looking for the point - something to add to "progress" with understanding and living in the world. I can respond to EVERY question with "it depends what you mean" - it adds nothing - it's an endless loop. And therefore I share dmb's frustration with you - make your point or shut the fuck up. I just happen to have a different style ;-) If your point is simply "to teach dmb a lesson" - then you need to find a bar and buy him a pint. Email ain't gonna cut it. Ian On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Steven Peterson <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Ian, > > Ian: > > Like I said : > > "Yes Steve, but when people say "Compatibilism is the position that free > > will and determinism are compatible rather than mutually exclusive > > positions." They are not (cannot be) using the SEP definition of > determinism > > you cite. They are using a less greedy definition - a la Dennett (who you > > also cite)." > > Steve: > Yes, of course the question depends on what one means by the terms. > So, would you agree that a more appropriate response to a claim that > free will and determinism are compatible would be, "that depends on > what you mean"? Or do you stand by dmb's approach?, e.g "you ignorant > slut!. That is just wildly incoherent and improper use of the basic > meanings of terms!" > > An important meta-issue here is the care we offer in trying to > understand what philosophers mean on their own terms (as dmb was > willing to do for James with his use of the word "chance" as > equivalent to free will but not for me in my non-metaphysical use of > the word "determinism"). Rather than insist that, say, anyone > defending abortion rights is hereby required to refer to her own > position as "pro-death" to respect "proper use of terms," we remain > open to nuance and even unfamiliar usages. Arguing for new ways of > using language is where the creative work has always been done in > philosophy. > > Best, > Steve > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
