(no subject)
I fail to see how anyone without a cunt for a brain could find anything worth talking about regarding Chisolm's Agent-Causation argument for moral responsibility.
Also, I have a theory that answers the epistemic justification problem by requiring an internalist stipulation for awareness of the justification ALONG WITH an externalist method (reliabilism, probably), using inductive beliefs as basic (because I solve every philosophical problem by appealing to induction). Why philosophers have such a stick up their ass about combining internalism and externalism is beyond me. Perhaps it's because apparently, no one's got any real grasp on what the distinction between the two amounts to. At the risk of implying that Richard Feldman (among other philosophers that I've been wet for since I started reading contemporary philosophy) has a cunt for a brain, philosophers who cannot come to grips with this issue have got cunts for brains.
How is your semester going?
Also, I have a theory that answers the epistemic justification problem by requiring an internalist stipulation for awareness of the justification ALONG WITH an externalist method (reliabilism, probably), using inductive beliefs as basic (because I solve every philosophical problem by appealing to induction). Why philosophers have such a stick up their ass about combining internalism and externalism is beyond me. Perhaps it's because apparently, no one's got any real grasp on what the distinction between the two amounts to. At the risk of implying that Richard Feldman (among other philosophers that I've been wet for since I started reading contemporary philosophy) has a cunt for a brain, philosophers who cannot come to grips with this issue have got cunts for brains.
How is your semester going?