Message from @sydtko
Discord ID: 662828078652850216
So even animals *seem capable of lying*
If you think that's functionally equivalent
I think that is
Since that... demonstrates they understand other animals to some extent... and their desire to steal their food
methode i think is making a case for when the animal has language
I think they do...
There's a video you can sort of get at running around an AI program called DeepSqueak
So rats have a patterned chirp/calling
Birds, whales, dolphins
... a vocalization is already an abstract symbol
Chomsky's pretty exclusionary of language
@Deleted User If lack agency, must be exterminated
this ^ seems very problematic for ecological notions. Algae doesn't have agency (normatively) you probably shouldn't be eliminating algae and bacteria
what in the actual fuck
@「SocradeezNuts」✓ᴸᵉᵗ ε<0 What's the topic
poland is pretty not communist
this is emotivism as well
noncog and emotivism gang is just correct <:Smug:643129431434461194>
Is vs as incoherent
Linguistics do not determine reality... except feeding back on it by impacting our understanding of it
Which is why I'm a linguistic trivialist...
You can call X true of false, it changes nothing about X'ness. It changes your sense of X
Metaphysical trivialism... I might be less willing to jump on board
Since I could only explain that with the phenomenon is a output of the contradictory...
Or thing in itself is nothing. X + not X = object...
I am unwilling to commit to that. Since it's mere possibility
Propositions are non physical <:MonkaS:643820797605183488>
dualism is cringe
@Deleted User It's not a contradiction if it is the case there is a fact of the matter
So it's like saying ... I believe there's a galaxy a thousand light years away
There is a fact of the matter there
Despite not having a referent on hand...
So you're proper or correct in believing it
@LustrousMandrill A meinongian
If you can reference it, it necessarily exists, but not in the same sense
So you equivocating "exist" or "existence"
But I don't particularly care
@Deleted User do you believe there are physical properties but not not physical substances?
@Deleted User How do you know other things are non mental?
Substance is a red herring, the substance is irrelevant if you ask me
Can't know the thing-in-itself, no way to demonstrate things without relations, blah blah
Leads to you shouldn't speak about a substance... aside that there is something
You can call it neutral monism, an idea, physical (any semantic name, via nominalism)