Tuesday, March 31, 2015

What would happen if we gave up coerced anti-discrimination? Coerced integration?

America white elites imposed these regimes of coercion in the late 20th Century to buy social peace, mouthing anti-racist pieties all the while.

Lots of people think they are still absolutely necessary.

Maybe they are.

What, you didn't see this coming?

Infanticide OK with Oxford ethicists

What women really wanted, all along.

Wait long enough and maybe everything the Nazis did that shocked the conscience of the Christian West will become perfectly ordinary, for obvious reasons.

Ah, that long, slow death of God.

There's more at stake

Churches will be required to do same-sex weddings, as will clergy.

One way or another, that's where it's going.

Questions For Indiana’s Critics

When they told you "Of course that will never happen" they were lying.

On the other hand, the conservatives are lying now when they claim it's not about the liberty to discriminate.

That is the issue when Christians refuse to participate in any way with gay marriages.

And that is also the issue when Christian motel owners refuse to rent rooms to un-married heterosexual couples or to persons of the same sex they suspect of being homosexual couples.

Liberals rightly point out that many people in the past and perhaps some even now wish to discriminate in similar ways against couples of mixed race, citing religious reasons.

Of course, they also denounce such people as abusing religion to hide bigotry, eerily echoing Obama's liberal propaganda that Islamic terrorists are hijacking, abusing, or lying that their activities have a religious sanction.

But the basic point is right.

What's at stake here is the freedom to discriminate, supported by an alleged right to do so for religious reasons and opposed by an alleged right not to be discriminated against.

Guess which moral allegation cuts ice, today?

Monday, March 30, 2015

Juan Williams, Zionism = racism

Whether he knows it or not, that's what he's saying.

Juan Williams: Boehner, Israel and race

Also, the Republicans are racist because they are mostly white and all their efforts at suppression of Democratic votes are actually racist.

Media precognition

0930 hrs EST = 1030 hrs EDT.

The story, posted at 1018 EDT, reports an event at 0930 EST.

1 Dead In Shooting At NSA Headquarters After Men In Drag Try To Ram Gate

Not a desert landscape

Numerous philosophers tolerate in their ontologies various sorts of abstracta including (in a list that may or may not be redundant) properties, propositions, sets, numbers, states of affairs, possible worlds, non-actual but possible individuals, fictional or mythic entities, appearances, irreducibly mental whatnots from propositional attitudes, perceivings, sensings, and feelings to talents and faculties, and perhaps more.

That sort of thing takes us a long way from materialism and "naturalism" as well as nominalism.

But it seems very natural to me.


The past is not necessary but only changeless.

In this it does not differ from the future.

They differ in that the future has not happened, yet, and the past has.

The A series is real, but so is the future.

So called "logical determinism" is true.

So I think.

Sunday, March 29, 2015

Agent causation

Suppose the brain is the Ego, the mind, the soul, the intellect, the self, that mental events are distinct from physical events, and non-redundant interactionism is true (think philosophical swerve).

Then in a case of interaction we can think of physical events as input and other physical events as output that the input physical events do not themselves cause; they are caused by intervening mental events, singly or in chains or in complexes, that themselves originate with the input physical events.

If a particular physical brain event as input causes a particular thinking event, do thinking events ever cause such physical brain events as output?

Are thinking events correlated with physical brain events in such wise that the occurrence of either causes the other?

Are any of those that seem to be voluntary choices not caused by preceding events, physical or mental, but instead simply by the self?

Factors in the mind/body mix

Dualisms, Cartesian and not

Substance (aka "Cartesian") dualism: being a mind and being a body are logically distinct properties of individuals which cannot be exemplified together.

Locke dissented, wondering why the same thing could not be both a mind and a body.

Event dualism 1: There are mental events and physical events but no event is both.

Event dualism 2: All events are physical events but some are also mental events

The unity of apperception (UA)

Multiple mental events may happen to the same mind, subject, or Ego.

In that case they are all thoughts, desires, sensations, or whatever of the same mind, subject, or Ego; it is the same "I" that "thinks" them all.

This rejects the "bundle theory" of mind that originated with Hume and is popular with some contemporary philosophers of mind.

Event identity (EI)

If event A = event B they happen to, involve, or relate all the same subjects, objects, or entities.

This seems an uncontroversial extension of the principle of the indiscernibility of identicals,
C From EI: No physical event in anyone's brain can be the same event as any mental event occurring in his - or anyone's - mind.

Event dualism 2 is not true.

Event dualism 1 does not exclude substance dualism.

But neither does it entail it.

The brain could be the Ego.

Dualism (Stanford) lucidly covers a lot of ground.


Identity criteria for events vary.

For example, Events.

Saturday, March 28, 2015

Kent on character

IV, 3, Kent to a gentleman appeals to the stars to account for differences in character among siblings, thus unknowingly giving Edmund the lie.