Monday, November 26, 2012

"The Shrew"



  1. Well, I have no idea what's going on with comments at my place at the moment, soooooo....

    "The paralyzed person has historical contingency on their side, and presumably they can still talk. But I assume next you'll bring up a person who can't talk, maybe can't hear or anything else, but maybe can move their head, then maybe at some point will get to Hume's analogy about a person born without any senses and ask whether that person has any thoughts or beliefs....."

    What does hearing have to do with it? Unlike some of the other examples, that is actually screened out by physiology; you can't choose not to hear. But yes, some paralyzed people can't talk, and I'm not just bringing that up as some kind of abstruse philosophical what-if; it's a real thing, look it up.

    But even so, what does historical contingency have to do with anything? You don't get a historical contingency bonus to your beliefs when you're amnesiac or dead, why should you get one when you're paralyzed? Either you have the beliefs here-and-now or you don't, there's no way that they have their own independent existential inertia.

  2. "Contrary to Hume's person, our paralyzed one has historical experiences and a still functioning mind lets say."

    Okay - so what follows from that?

  3. It looks like when it reaches 51 you have to scroll all the way to the bottom and click "load more".

    Yeah, we're a couple a friggin' dopes - so my comment is over there.

    Just so we're clear though, I figured it out first, that's gotta be good for somethin'.

  4. But in any case, I'm not saying anything follows from it. Talking is just another human activity.

  5. Oh, bad interface design, google! Tsk tsk. Okay, so if you want to take this back over, now I know what to do.