κοζιμα θρύλος

♪ its impossible to help all those in need so youve got to choose... but on what basis? friendliness? youth? gender? or potential for the future?

This seems pretty important.

Reification or hypostatisation is a helluva drug

Kant in a nutshell

What's his objection to platonism about maths actually? Maybe he doesn't use the now classic epistemological argument. Perhaps he argues from modality?

Well fine, those are causally continuous with the actual present. What about stuff by stipulation causally discontinuous with the actual present?

What, apparently in the 19th century "relation between... to..." was a possible construction. Weird!

山括弧塾ユーチューブ進出してるやん

Yeah refuting nonsense is way costlier than spewing nonsense

For me *not lol

It's not that he doesn't define intuition, it's just that the definition is abstract enough for me to get a solid grasp of it

It reads almost like a framing. You put a frame around a drawing and you get an aesthetic framing. You watch a ball fly through the air so that you can analyse its motion and you get a physics framing. His contention seems to be that every cognition presupposes a certain framing

time, but this just spawns more problems than it dissolves. Why are our minds still so irrational and stubborn? What's the actual mechanism? Is a mind complex or simple? If there's a degree of complexity, how is it determined? How do we know?... So on and so forth.

We're definitely not as orderly as the universe, nor our societies are. We break rules and norms all the time. There seems to be a fundamental difference between human norms and laws of nature. Now he tries to dissolve this by appeal to (simpler) minds becoming more habitual over

Is peirce a libertarian about free will? The doctrine of tychism seems to point to the absolute spontaneity of firstness and given that everything is ultimately mental according to him every causal chain seems to have to be terminated in the mental. But the obvious problem with

youtu.be/MWnL1HTVDEg Not to harp on this too much but again this conversation is too early for Japan

regulation but it'll be another ground for corruption. Yes, those who have the capacity morally ought to use the power for the common good, but the whole notion of equality presupposes rational egoism, which incentivises (at least in the short term) a neglect of the common good.

The problem with egalitarianism is it goes hand in hand with free market economy. We know if left completely unfettered it will create a massive inequality of wealth and therefore power; end up defeating the whole purpose. We'd need to have enough power concentrated for

ササロー7y0w8kだけど球速出てないのが気がかりだなあ