mirror of
https://gitlab.com/upRootNutrition/obsidian.git
synced 2025-08-09 05:14:42 -05:00
vault backup: init
This commit is contained in:
Nick
commit
dc5e896346
1512 changed files with 1034902 additions and 0 deletions
43
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Agnosticism.md
Executable file
43
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Agnosticism.md
Executable file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
|
|||
### Agnosticism Argument
|
||||
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**Variable**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definition**</font> |
|
||||
|:----------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**U**</font> | one (x) can unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on a proposition (y) |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**K**</font> | one (x) knows why they believe that a proposition (y) is true |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**W**</font> | one (x) should temporarily withhold the belief that a proposition (y) is true |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**o**</font> | the interlocutor |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**r**</font> | the proposition at hand |
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>P1)</b></font> If one cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on a proposition, then one does does not know why they believe that a proposition is true.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∀x∀y(¬Uxy→¬Kxy))</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>P2)</b></font> If one does not know why they believe that a proposition is true, then one should temporarily withhold the belief that a proposition is true.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∀x∀y(¬Kxy→Wxy))</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>P3)</b></font> The interlocutor cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on the proposition at hand.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(¬Uor)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, the interlocutor should temporarily withhold the belief that the proposition at hand is true.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∴Wor)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
</font>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(~3Uxy~5~3Kxy)),(~6x~6y(~3Kxy~5Wxy)),(~3Uor)|=(Wor))
|
||||
|
||||
## Hashtags
|
||||
|
||||
#arguments
|
||||
#philosophy
|
||||
#debate
|
||||
35
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Libertarian Free Will.md
Executable file
35
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Libertarian Free Will.md
Executable file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
|||
### Argument Against Libertarian Free Will
|
||||
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|
||||
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------- |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**P(x)**</font> | (x) is deterministic |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**Q(x)**</font> | (x) follows from antecedent conditions |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**R(x)**</font> | (x) violates causality |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**x**</font> | an event |
|
||||
| <font color="CC6600">**w**</font> | a libertarian free choice |
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>P1)</b></font> For all x, where x is an event, x is deterministic if, and only if, x follows from antecedent conditions.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∀x(Px↔Qx))</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>P2)</b></font> For all x, where x is an event, x violates causality if, and only if, x does not follow from antecedent conditions.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∀x(Rx↔¬Qx))</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>P3)</b></font> A libertarian free choice is not deterministic.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(¬Pw)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, a libertarian free choice violates causality.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∴Rw)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
</font>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
77
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Modus Bronens.md
Executable file
77
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Modus Bronens.md
Executable file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
|
|||
## Modus Bronens
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>P1)</b></font> If studies show that PUFA is preferable to SFA for heart disease prevention, then people who wish to lower their heart disease risk should generally lower their SFA intake and increase their PUFA intake.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(P→Q)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>P2)</b></font> I don't like Nick's face.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(¬N)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, studies do not show that PUFA is preferable to SFA for heart disease prevention and people who wish to lower their heart disease risk should not generally lower their SFA intake and increase their PUFA intake.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∴¬P∧¬Q)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
</font>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>P1)</b></font> If LDL causes CVD, then those whose LDL increases in response to a carnivore diet should take steps to lower their LDL.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(P→Q)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>P2)</b></font> Nick is not the epitome of health.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(¬N)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, LDL does not cause CVD and those whose LDL increases in response to a carnivore diet should not take steps to lower their LDL.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∴¬P∧¬Q)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
</font>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>P1)</b></font> If Anna does act in bad faith, then Nick is justified in blocking Anna.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(P→Q)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>P2)</b></font> I don't like the fact that Nick uses pragmatic markers in his discourse.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(¬N)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, Anna does not act in bad faith and Nick is not justified in blocking Anna.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<font color="CC6600">
|
||||
<b>(∴¬P∧¬Q)</b>
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
</font>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Hashtags
|
||||
|
||||
#clownery
|
||||
#philosophy
|
||||
#logic
|
||||
#propositional_logic
|
||||
42
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Philosophy Gibberish.md
Executable file
42
🛡️ Debate/🪶 Arguments/Philosophy/Philosophy Gibberish.md
Executable file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
|
|||
direct reference
|
||||
externalist epistemology
|
||||
metaphysical modality
|
||||
ontological modality
|
||||
phenomenal conservatism
|
||||
transcendental realism
|
||||
correspondence theory of truth
|
||||
disjunctivism
|
||||
libertarian free will
|
||||
theism
|
||||
content internalism
|
||||
subjective idealism
|
||||
parallelism
|
||||
pre-established harmony
|
||||
epiphenomenalism
|
||||
non-entailing explanations
|
||||
causal powers
|
||||
inductive arguments
|
||||
abductive arguments
|
||||
metaphysical essence
|
||||
relative identity
|
||||
stance-independent norm
|
||||
non-inferential justification
|
||||
private language
|
||||
moral particles
|
||||
ultimate grounds
|
||||
invariant justification
|
||||
transcendental oneness
|
||||
equal ultimacy
|
||||
personal creation
|
||||
single consciousness ontology
|
||||
mind-heart connection
|
||||
synthetic a priori
|
||||
non-physical mental entities
|
||||
externalist value
|
||||
warrant
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Hashtags
|
||||
|
||||
#philosophy
|
||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue