obsidian/🛡️ Debate/🗡️ Opponents/Csypher.md

Debate 1

Proposition

"Preferences are gibberish"

Argument

Definiendum	Definiens
P	one's concept (x) is private
E	others can have epistemic access to one's concept (x)
R	a concept (x) can have a shared referent
M	the concept (x) refers to material external to the mind
C	a concept (x) can be communicated
p	preference

P1) One's concept is private if, and only if, others cannot have epistemic access to one's concept.
(∀x(Px↔¬Ex))
P2) One's concept can have a shared referent if, and only if, one's concept refers to material external to the mind.
(∀x(Rx↔Mx))
P3) One's concept can be communicated if, and only if, one's concept is not private and one's concept can have a shared referent.
(∀x(Cx↔¬Px∧Rx))
P4) Others can not have epistemic access one's preferences.
(¬Ep)
P5) One's preferences do not refer to material external to the mind.
(¬Mp)
C) Therefore, one's preferences cannot be communicated.
(∴¬Cp)

Proof Tree

Analysis

1. No clear reason to accept P1, P2, or P3 until the modality for possibility/impossibility is provided.
2. No clear reason to accept P4 or P5. They're just empirical claims.

---

Hashtags

#debate #debate_opponents #clowns #clownery #philosophy #moral_subjectivism