|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
 Posted - 01/18/2003 : 19:08:37 [Permalink]
|
Phd:
I've never seen this usage of "personal" defined, other than "it's something that can't be explained/created by an
impersonal source," which is question-begging and/or "it's something that humans have/something that makes us
human," which is tautological. However Mr. Webster states: quote:
Main Entry: per·son
Pronunciation: 'p&r-s&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French persone, from Latin
persona actor's mask, character in a play, person, probably from
Etruscan phersu mask, from Greek prosOpa, plural of prosOpon
face, mask -- more at PROSOPOPOEIA
Date: 13th century
1 : HUMAN, INDIVIDUAL -- sometimes used in combination especially
by those who prefer to avoid man in compounds applicable to both
sexes <chairperson> <spokesperson>
2 : a character or part in or as if in a play : GUISE
3 a : one of the three modes of being in the Trinitarian Godhead as
understood by Christians b : the unitary personality of Christ that unites
the divine and human natures
4 a archaic : bodily appearance b : the body of a human being; also :
the body and clothing <unlawful search of the person>
5 : the personality of a human being : SELF
6 : one (as a human being, a partnership, or a corporation) that is
recognized by law as the subject of rights and duties
7 : reference of a segment of discourse to the speaker, to one spoken
to, or to one spoken of as indicated by means of certain pronouns or in
many languages by verb inflection
- per·son·hood /-"hud/ noun
- in person : in one's bodily presence
|
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
 |
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 01/18/2003 : 19:46:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Be that as it may, it still appears that the 'problem' with foreknowledge is indemic. I must admit to not being very good at this stuff, but, it seems to me, the problem is not that omniscience is logically incompatible with free will, or that omniscience is logically incompatible with determinism, but that omniscience is paradoxical.
Indeed. I know you get over to Infidels - have you kept up on the arguments of "Thomas Metcalf"? His philosophical dissection of omniscience has been a real eye-opener.
quote:
Hofstadter is pretty sharp, but it's Achilles, the Tortoise who I have trouble with.
Heh. Few things I don't understand are as satisfying to think about.  I understand there exists a solution to Zeno's Paradox within some subset of calculus. I haven't even bothered to research it.
|
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 01/18/2003 : 19:49:40 [Permalink]
|
| DA, I must be missing something. As far as I can tell, that list of usages supports your contention that a "personal" being must have a "personal" cause precisely not at all. Would you like to try the argument behind Door No. 2? |
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 01/18/2003 : 23:15:11 [Permalink]
|
To Phd When good old Aristotle ran in to folks who would try and convince him of their non-existence in a crowd of people he simply would ignore them completely.This would cause some in the crowd to question why the good philosoper wouldn't answer their arguments,to which he would reply "How can you answer someone who's not there? It seems your leaning in the same direction as they Phd. Do you belive your here? (edited for missing word) |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 01/19/2003 19:49:22 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2003 : 01:42:00 [Permalink]
|
PhDreamer wrote:quote:
Seconded. BUT, be prepared to devote several months; rereading passages several times is almost a necessity. Hofstader is almost too brilliant for his own good.
You aren't kidding. As a person who was introduced to GEB:EGB at the age of 15, by my father who thought I "might be interested in it," I can assure everyone that, 21 years and three readings later, I still don't have a good grasp on what Hofstader is trying to tell me.
Maybe a fourth reading will clear it up?!?
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2003 : 20:19:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
To Phd When good old Aristotle ran in to folks who would try and convince him of their non-existence in a crowd of people he simply would ignore them completely.This would cause some in the crowd to question why the good philosoper wouldn't answer their arguments,to which he would reply "How can you answer someone who's not there? It seems your leaning in the same direction as they Phd. Do you belive your here?
I don't think that's a meaningful question. I don't know how to disbelieve I'm "here." I imagine if I honestly believed I wasn't "here," I would have to cease interacting with the "world." |
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2003 : 20:52:51 [Permalink]
|
Phd: quote:
I don't think that's a meaningful question. I don't know how to disbelieve I'm "here." I imagine if I honestly believed I
wasn't "here," I would have to cease interacting with the "world."
Good enough,cogito ergo sum is fine by me.Now as it relates to the "problems" raised by you concerning "divine foreknowledge and free will" and the question I raised concerning as to how a purely materialistic cosmos could give rise to thinking ergos, I hope to prove that your problems are merely hypothetical while the problem I raised is very material. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2003 : 21:05:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
Good enough,cogito ergo sum is fine by me.Now as it relates to the "problems" raised by you concerning "divine foreknowledge and free will" and the question I raised concerning as to how a purely materialistic cosmos could give rise to thinking ergos, I hope to prove that your problems are merely hypothetical while the problem I raised is very material.
Nope. And the Greek words don't make your assertion any stronger. It's apparent that, among the wide range of living things on the planet, we have a similarly wide range of "consciousness" or "personality" or whatever you want to call it.
To sum up: I have seen your dichotomy, and it is false. Yea, verily.
|
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
Antie
Skeptic Friend
USA
101 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2003 : 21:34:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
And the Greek words don't make your assertion any stronger.
They're Latin words! |
Antie. DIES GAUDII.
Facies Fabulosarum Feminarum
If you can name all six of the females in the picture above without looking up their names, and you can read the Latin phrase, pat yourself on the back. You're smart. |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2003 : 22:02:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Antie
They're Latin words!
Well, duh! Obviously I meant "words once spoken by some long-dead Greeks." I'm busy, I don't have time to write out everything! Sheesh! |
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2003 : 22:28:05 [Permalink]
|
Phd: quote:
Nope. And the Greek words don't make your assertion any stronger. It's apparent that, among the wide range of living
things on the planet, we have a similarly wide range of "consciousness" or "personality" or whatever you want to call it.
To sum up: I have seen your dichotomy, and it is false. Yea, verily.
?Que paso? You don't try explaining your checking account to your pet do you? Or the discuss your favorite ice cream with your plants? (edited for sp) |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 01/21/2003 00:53:45 |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2003 : 09:00:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
Phd:To sum up: I have seen your dichotomy, and it is false. Yea, verily.
?Que paso? You don't try explaining your checking account to your pet do you? Or the discuss your favorite ice cream with your plants?(edited for sp)
That's it? That's your refutation of my assertion that "personality" exists on an obvious continuum? Not only does your dichotomy get falser and falser, your only definition of "personality" seems to be "the set of those clever things that only humans do." |
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2003 : 15:55:27 [Permalink]
|
Phd: quote:
Not only does your
dichotomy get falser and falser, your only definition of "personality" seems to be "the set of those clever things that only
humans do."
So you do believe in talking to your plants??? |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
Legallee Insane
Skeptic Friend
Canada
126 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2003 : 16:02:34 [Permalink]
|
There is a line in a song I once heard; "The road that leads to all, leads to one."
Though I don't believe in predetermination by any stretch of the imagination, perhaps it is conceivable that it would be much like any problem you might try to solve during your typical day at work or school or any thing like that. There are multiple ways that you could go about solving the problem that will all lead to the same conclusion. So I suppose it is conceivable that if things were predetermined, then free will could also exist at the same time. There would be multiple courses of action that would all, inevitably, lead to the same predetermined event. |
--"Only the fool says in his heart: There is no god -- The wise says it to the world"
--"I darn you to HECK!" - Catbert
--"Don't worry, we're not laughing at you, we're laughing near you." |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2003 : 19:06:47 [Permalink]
|
To PhdI really can't see what defintion you are using for person/ality but here is one from The Dictonary of Philosophyyhat works for me: quote:
An individual capable of moral agency. Although the details of their theories of human nature differ
widely, Descartes, Locke, Kant, and Strawson all accepted a functional description of the person that
includes both mental and physical features: the attribution of responsibility to a moral agent requires both
the ability to choose and an ability to act on that choice.
Recommended Reading: James B. Reichmann, Philosophy of the Human Person (Loyola, 1985)
{at Amazon.com}; P. F. Strawson, Individuals: an Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics (Routledge,
1979) {at Amazon.com}; Roderick M. Chisholm, Person and Object: A Metaphysical Study (Open
Court, 1979) {at Amazon.com}; Derek Parfit, Reasons and Persons (Oxford, 1986) {at Amazon.com};
Richard Moran, Authority and Estrangement (Princeton, 2001) {at Amazon.com}; A.J. Ayer, Concept
of a Person (Palgrave, 1998) {at Amazon.com}; and Phyllis Sutton, Sartre's Concept of a Person: An
Analytic Approach (Massachusetts, 1976) {at Amazon.com}.
Also see OCP on person and self, IEP, BGHT on Person and Self, SEP on biological and feminist
theories, noesis, and Amos Yong.
If you have a source which can clarify your position of personality that isn't related to a person,by all means please share. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
