"Not win, but feel it was "productive". That me, the person I'm debating, or some other person (e.g. a reader) is getting something out of it (or will). To me philosophy isn't about winning or losing, it's about…"
"LOL...90% of the debates I have online end up being deadends. The productive 10% make it somehow worth it for me. Also, the process of debating in itself is one I use to get the brain going and perhaps think new thoughts (even if debates can get…"
"I'm impressed that you are bothering to try to follow it. We've gone off way too many tangents for it to be of any use.I'm just not the type that can let things go when I think another person is making some really big mistakes. Saying…"
"Properties aren't "imagined", they are "real". It's the reason particles end up at the bottom of a hill due to the properties of a ball (roundness), hill (angle), and gravity (space-time curvature). Without these…"
"It can be logically invoked...unless you are saying such has no semantic meaning. If that's the case I must wholeheartedly disagree that it's "meaningless" in that sense.
Do you find debating about semantics as boring as I do?…"
"Sure, pink flying unicorns are non-existent in the universe. They don't exist. This is different than saying "non-existents exist in the universe" (e.g. non-existent pink-flying unicorns exist in the universe) - which is…"
"Our semantics of the word exist are so different that to discuss this is moot. Everything is "conceived by the mind" including "physical objects", "physical relationships", "physical properties", etc.…"
"It only exists due to objects that have mass. The two are not mutually exclusive. If you feel it's more correct, we can say that there exists no matter that doesn't bend space-time (be missing the property that bends space-time). The point…"
"Umm...yes...it is. You can call my claims "transcendental" but that is simply a statement, not an argument backed up by anything. Per your assessment, all of physics is "transcendental" (e.g. special relativity, general…"
"I'm saying that determinism is equally as reasonable as indeterminism, so both possibilities must be assessed (and that they are the only two possibilities). Free will is logically contradictory in both. ;-)
I never said there…"
"If you mean that they both don't exist as "objects" I agree. I'm not saying they are "the same", only that existence applies to things like "relationships" (e.g. a relationship between object X and object Y…"
Well Done Trick....We have an author in our midst.....I haven't read your book so can not comment on it...However anyone who has taken the time to write a book has my respect...Good luck with it.........