DISQUS

DISQUS Hello!  The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.

Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.

Brock's picture

Unregistered

Feeds

aliases

  • Brock

Brock

1 year ago

in All Disaster, Only Part Natural on Will Wilkinson
It is a common mistake to confuse a country’s level of redistribution with its system of economic organization, but it is a mistake.

I hope that you will be calling on conservatives, as well as your fellow libertarians, to stop smearing modest income redistribution policies, such as the minimum wage, with the label "socialism".

1 year ago

in The Courage to Conjoin on Will Wilkinson
Will, taking the argument to an epistemological level doesn't work. Compare:

(1) I know that the Peano axioms are all true.
(2) I don't know whether the Goldbach conjecture is true.
(3) Therefore, the Goldbach conjecture is compatible with the Peano axioms.

1 year ago

in The Courage to Conjoin on Will Wilkinson
Oops, the end of that last sentence should read

because “The lump is made of whatever it is made of” is not the antecedent of the conditional.

1 year ago

in The Courage to Conjoin on Will Wilkinson
I endorse your compatibilist conclusion Will, but your argument for it is fallacious.

Here are two things you know: free will exists (it is obvious: go ahead, touch your nose) and the universe is made of whatever it is made of (obvious, if anything is). Therefore, you know the conjunction of those two things. Therefore, you know that the crazy proposition that says that one of them must be false isn’t true!

The problem with your argument: "The universe is made of whatever it is made of" is not the thesis of materialism, and is not the antecedent of the conditional premise of the argument. So showing that it is compatible with free will does not show that materialism is compatible with free will. (Since it's a tautology, it better be compatible with free will, since otherwise contradictions are true!)

Suppose I have a lump of metal, and a nearby Geiger counter, which is not detecting any radiation. I reason: "If the lump were made of uranium, my Geiger counter would be clicking. It is not clicking. Therefore, the lump is not uranium."

One cannot refute the major premise of this argument by pointing out the compatibility of "The lump is made of whatever it is made of" with "The Geiger counter is not clicking", because "The lump is not made of whatever it is made of" is not the antecedent of the conditional.
Returning? Login