Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philosophy/Archive 12

2698:, which deals with a gene which correlates to predisposition to spirituality. It is a popular press topic with little scientific backing so not very encyclopaedic. However, the topic about the human predisposition to search for metaphysical answers is central to several works of some philosophers, such as late Shopenhauer and Nitsche, if I am not mistaken, so I was hoping if someone could give the article a look and give it a check (e.g. terminology etc) and add a brief section linking to philosophical lines of thought? Or if it is too rubbish, add a warning tag. Thanks -- 968:

prime starting point for social and critical theory. As to the "shcool"-issue I also find it reasonable to maintain the idea of an ongoing "Frankfurth School". When you visit the Philosophy department in Frankfurt, there is a clear self-understanding of belonging to a common school. Certainly (and this has been so already since Habermas) with very emphasized relations with other schools. But you cannot be appointed to the department, if you claim that "social critique" is unimportant (I agree certainly that the Frankfurters do not have exclusive rights on this focus) --

4733:

and the lives of ordinary people in general. To use a separate but related example, when someone like Rodney Brooks at MIT uses a definition of living things as "machines whose components are biochemicals", it affects more than just the field of robotics. It affects product design, legal regulations and debates in many other other spheres. So yes, I think there is some value in having an article that is about, if not "all the senses simultaneously", then at least "several senses, independently and in relation to one another, in context".

4927:, compared to the recent version. The editor who did the revert is giving time for other editors to contribut under the "construction" tag, so I asked for some help here since the subject crosses so many fields of study outside my area (Sartre and de Beauvoir were influential outside of philosophy). For example, while I was at Stanford for 11 years, and I am friends with SEP chief editor, who told me he mostly wrote the SEP mathematical (realism) article, I will have to do a lot of reading to explain in plain English what 4359:, you talk about persons as being an area of philosophical debate (like free will and determinism). Something like “in philosophy the concept of a person is the subject of extensive discussion. There are three (maybe more if you can think of them) questions: Are persons human? (Puccetti says aliens can be persons). Are persons physical? (life after death, mind transference etc.) What is it that makes a person the same person over time? (personal identity, self identity)”. I think this approach might be easier. -- 4066:. I have placed the review of the article "on hold" because there are some changes that need to be made to the article before I can pass it. I have notified the nominator as well another user who has made significant contributions to the article, but neither of them have been active on wikipedia recently. I was hoping another editor who is familiar with this topic could help this article along. The article is in fairly good shape, and I'd hate to fail it because of minor details. Please see the article's 3050:"Mind-body problem" is probably the better known term; Beyond prevailing usage, I wondered for a bit which of 'problem' or 'dichotomy' was the less loaded and POV term. I think 'problem' is actually more neutral. If, for example, you hold that there is no dichotomy between the mind and the body (I guess that would be a form of type identity?) then there's no 'problem'. And Greg's correct about the current form being the preferred title format (though the en/em dash thing threw me for a moment). 552:. However, they are largely ignored. There are often instances of articles where symbols are changed and then changed again and again... There are even templates to make things easy... but people don't know about them, or ignore them, or they just prefer another symbol and are determined to have it. Please do use the {{and}} template type of notation as promulgated in the standards doc. If there is consensus to change the standard, we can change them all at once usingthis method. Be well, 4802:, (a) if there are reliable sources where it is argued that they all have something in common, then the article should set out the argument citing the sources (b) otherwise it is pointless in having an article which is not about one of the different senses. The belief of an editor that they have something in common is neither here nor there unless they themsleves are a reliable source with publications that can be cited, otherwise the aticle becomes OR. 31: 1141:

to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research and to suggest new sources to me by comments on that page. I would especially appreciate hearing about more sources that take a philosophical perspective or that broaden the discussion of intelligence to include nonhuman intelligence. --

5102:

and events have existence independent of the mind) with arguments about mathematical realism (the doctrine that numbers have existence independent of the mind). This seems to have been brought about by a careless reading of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on realism, where Mackie's error-theoretic account of morality is compared with Field's error-theory of arithmetic. I do not believe that Mackie said anything about “

3821:

specified page numbers; 5) Source not quoted with the title found under ISBN, which is not in English; 6) very unlikeliy to have been included in any Great Books program; 7) in spite of claimed notoriety since 1920, no additional info to be found via google; 8) Complete content added by a single person; 9) History showing a deletion by a user claiming to know the person who did this as a joke. Best,

1732:

conscepts, resources, and everyting else comes from. if we dont have the power, then we create it, thus takeing something in return as an equal... if we have the perception to know the outcome and its consequences, and in turn ther consequences' consequences...when the bad outcomes outway the good outcomes, only then do we have the right to take someting and make it seem like it nevered existed.

3333:. Please keep your arguments civil; there's no reason for the weaseling you're doing, like "some layperson" or "some college writing book". That's just shy of "some idiot" and "some stupid writers writing for ignoramuses". Your argument, if correct, will stand on its own - don't unnecessarily attack people or put them on the defense. (Also remember to sign your comments; consider registering!) 611:

and at the user's talk page as well, and I will have an eye on the issue. However, I would be glad if someone with an interest in that topic, and someone who is more experienced with formal issues (disambiguation link was deleted, three project boxes were moved to the bottom of the article) took a look as well. What does one do if a rollback to the old version is indicated? All the best, --

4623:

analytic study of the term. The third section could be special meanings for the term, such as are found in law. The Second part would be concerned with what counts as a person, an alien? a computer? a brain dead human body? The development of a template (be this for the person article on its own or more generally) would have to be a group effort. I have no interest in doing this alone. --

1349: 1313: 1070: 1031: 1801:

ethics. I have placed a quote on the talk page by the way. Anyway, I would like to have some help because it will require quite some work. Also somebody to discuss the matters with before fixing things that are not as broke as I might think they are. Is anybody willing to talk things over with me? I'll do the work myself if you are short on time (as I can image unfortunately). --

2204:

deontological ethics, which I have severely referenced but is also not accepted by these users. In both articles a retracing of our steps is being undertaken. The request for references is continuously being restated while I have already done so. Perhaps more voices can solve this issue without letting it escalate even further. So, I would like to ask for some help in this. --

2537:

looking for any editors who might be willing to help with the writing and with finding philosophy sources, in particular editors with formal training in academic philosophy who are able and willing to write up arguments and counter-arguments carefully and neutrally. Anyone willing to help, please let me know on the article's talk page or on mine. Many thanks!

4817:

consciousness, or formerly active but still potential consciousness, which is recognized by the user of the term as being a unit by its cognitive capacities, which recognition changes depending on the context intended by the user of the term.” But as with any definition, the above definition can again be extended with additional qualifiers, ad infinitum.

5372: 4874: 1978:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 1945:. Could any neutral editor with an interest in post structuralist thought help here, it is just revert after revert and this warring is discouraging otherwise competent editors from contributing. N.B. Please do not post below if you are one of the warring editors as it will simply extend the same arguments into a diferent arena -- 1455:) be shared around a little. Feel free to muck in. There's lots to say. I've just read that Hegel thought loyalty to be unjustly founded, whereas Bismark boasted that it was a virtue that was peculiarly German. I'm sure that there's more in the same vein. If everyone does a paragraph each, we might have a good stub soon. 4699:

those debates – e.g. the corporate personhood stuff, the abortion debates (specifically Susan Bordo's fascinating essay "Are Mothers Persons?") and the promise or threat that "transhumanists" bring to the subject. And this is something I am willing to spend some time on, both independently and in cooperation with others.

2414: 2344: 2484: 2274: 4962:

The page is clearly within the scope of this project, though it's not terribly important or central. I rated it as Start-class, Low importance on the Talk page; hopefully even that weak claim will lend some force to the (reasonable) request to include philosophy content. (It's crazy to me that this

4824:

There will always be a problem of WP”synth and WP:OR in any philosophy project defining first sentence. Logicalgregory’s suggestiong to build the body before the head seems good. (Building the head based on what is in the body means that a person is determined by what is in the body, not the head …

4676:

As for the body, I really like Logicalgregory's suggestion for how to structure the article. But I would be wary of the (somewhat contradictory) suggestion that we turn the Person article into just another specialized philosophy article. There is too much at stake in the debates in broader society to

4622:

means, the second to deal with instances of reference. The first section of the first part could deal with the etymology and lexicography of the term; the empirical study of its use in literature. The second section of the first part could be the philosophical analysis of the concept of a person; the

3129:

I am a little less dubious of removing psychoanalysis from philosophy of mind. That was probably appropriate. However I am not a big continental type, so I am wondering what the group thinks about these others. I am pretty sure that there is some degree of consideration of psychoanalysis in the field

2872:

I don't really understand what you're saying (possibly a failing on my part), but I agree with your conclusion that the article should probably be deleted. I'm glad you brought up the point here so that if there is any reason to save the article the knowledgeable editors of this project can speak up

1579:

Ok then, I guess -- but I don't see how Type/Token distinction really bears on this; sentence types versus sentence tokens is orthogonal to the question of whether a proposition is a sentence (I maintain they're not) but as long as you're willing to concede that I guess we're in at least some measure

1550:

I really don't see that this is a mathematical logic versus philosophy thing; It seems to me that you are presenting a particular view (that propositions are sentences) as uncontroversial and obvious when in fact the opposite is true, the status of propositions as truth bearers or as the meanings of

1519:

There is an on-going issue of mathematicians removing philosophy content from logic articles under the pretense of NPOV. Let me state for the record that coverage of content that is important to philosophers is not POV pushing, it is academic subject matter. Currently, there are a few of them pushing

543:

I might be wrong but it seems like many diferent symbols are used for truth functionl operators on logic related papers (for example, unless i've missunderstood, it seems that both a both-ways arrow and a tripple equal are used to express a biconditional). I think the articals would be easier to read

4782:

User:Pfhorrest, regarding your opening question, "WP:Knowledge is not complete", or some such expression, is a guideline or policy. So if you just sit it out until the techological Singularity takes over all consciousness, the problem will go away, maybe not in platonic space, but here, since there

4519:

I have now had time to read the Pfhorrest and Walkinxyz discussion and am impressed by the amount of time and work they have put into this. However, I feel they are spending too much time on the head of the Person article when the body needs attention. Might I suggest that the head of the article be

4246:

That is a very presumptuous anonymous comment. If there were any real "ownership" issues they wouldn't be manifesting at the philosophy project talk page for everyone to chime in, would they? Furthermore, while I disagree with philogo, there is no notion in my mind that wp:own is a problem with him.

3452:

is jargon and has never been a term in the strict sense in logic or computer science. If you think about it, it does not make any sense—it is a variable in a metalanguage (so meta- or metalinguistic variable would be fine), but neither is it from some metasyntax, nor does it stand for some syntactic

1800:

Hello everybody, I have seen a number of strange things on the pages concerning ethics here. Most I can sort of handle myself, however, there is a page that needs to be redone completely because the very title is incorrect: consequantialism. This is a different word for utilism, not for teleological

1140:

for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on intelligence and related issues, some of which I see are in the scope of this WikiProject. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in those issues (and

967:

I think that Honneth should be brought back into the article, but not as a member of "second" generation, but rather as the main figure of the third generation. Honneth draws severely on the communicative turn of the second generation, but has also emphasised that communicative relations are not the

378:

I suggest handing this article off to any grad student in philosophy of physics at CMU and asking Bryan Skyrms or Clark Glymour or Bas van Frassen to do a quick review (Yvon Gauthier in Montreal probably even knows the Heidegger required to debunk her Descartes interpretation). Her misrepresentation

209:

plays a prominent role (which also relates to the Continuum hypothesis) in his distinction of a Platon-Descartes vs. an Aristotle-Leibniz lineage (the first maybe leading to Badiou, the second maybe to Deleuze?). The Axiom of choice is important in deciding whether non-constructable entities will be

5101:

I do know something about the philosophy of mathematics and have read two of Mackie's books (but not the one about morals). I do not think the philosophy of mathematics has got any connection with bad faith. Looks like somebody has confused Mackie's argument about realism (the doctrine that objects

4732:

Good question. I would say that what they have in common is an impact on our common understanding; and also the understanding of researchers and social scientists, who are concerned with diverse problems and involved in divergent pursuits, but whose work nonetheless affects each others' disciplines

4535:

I would be happy with any improvements to be made to the body. The debate ongoing there now is because I object to his proposed change to the lede, and he is presenting rather detailed arguments in justification of that proposal, which I believe deserve equally details rebuttals. (I don't feel like

3750:

under "getting started." Other than that perhaps you could take a look at the articles about which you are most knowledgeable and interested and improve or otherwise raise issues there and on this talk page. The navigation template has links to pages that everyone should look into on occasion also.

1402:

needs help. He met with Heidegger and I think was lede editor on Heidegger for Harper & Row. Was friend of Hanna Arendt, who wrote fairly extensive intro on his most significant work "The Warriors." I've long suspected this memoir concerningn WWII influenced various writers and filmmakers whose

916:

Yes, I believe I might have been the one who removed him. Note that the article starts with the earliest theorists and ends with the work of Habermas. The problem with the term "Frankfurt School" is that its meaning and scope may vary according to different sources. It is not necessarily synonymous

4682:

Of course there is a very important place for philosophy on this subject and, unfortunately, the "Personal Identity" article does not do the literature justice. A "Personhood (philosophy)" or "Person (philosophy)" article might be good, but only if someone with the relevant expertise wants to dive

4335:

I think you are likely to go on forever, if you try to find an acceptable definition of “Person” by debate in the discussion pages of Knowledge. I think an acceptable definition of a person is still a subject of debate in the literature of philosophy. I find three entire books on the subject on my

4269:

which was and is the appropriate place for such discussions: is that not correct? It should be noticed that other Project groups (Linguistics and Maths) have declared their interest in the article and they are more likely to notice comments on the article's talk page than here. The proposed merge

4213:

I disapprove of this organization. The overwhelmingly prevailing term in the literature for the concept is "logical consequence." "Entailment" and "implication" are forms of logical consequence. This is how I organized the categories. I just don't understand you philogo. You seem to be pretty well

4035:

I've identified several sources by credentialled experts. There are probably more. Some rapid refactoring to replace the top-of-the-head content with no sources with a good verifiable stub supported by expert sources is needed. Unfortunately, I don't have the time for another philosophy article

2901:

article; it treats atheism only as positive atheism, instead of both positive and negative atheism. And then it says "This position means 'I care (so I'm not apatheistic) but don't know if "God exists" is true, or if "God doesn't exist" is true, and don't subscribe either way.", which is just weak

2203:

Hello everybody, I am trying to add two things that are (in my opinion) unjustly withheld by two editors. On the morality page it is only a reference, that I have had to reference, but still seems not enough and on the teleology page it is a general explanation of teleological ethics as opposed to

2140:

appears to not have been broken. I have decided to stop editing the article for now, posted an RfC already, but think this needs greater immediate attention, especially with multiple complaints filled at ANI. If anyone can contribute consensus to the definition of amorality, they are encouraged to

1683:

It should be no surprise to see a similar class of objects similarly described. I have stated my reasoning sufficiently in the introductory paragraph. The SEP refers to the type-token distinction as an important distinction. In these cases identifying that an object is an idea rather than physical

1569:

B of K, the content including the term "sentence" I am perfectly open to using the most general "statement" or something involving all possible terms like "statement (also proposition, or sentence)." The term "sentence" was not the big issue, because there will be no problem arriving at something.

1283:

within its area, so I am posting here for outside opinions. There is a disagreement on the History of painting talk page regarding the number of images within the article. I believe the majority of the 400 images need to be removed while other editors believe the article is fine as it is. Opinions

610:

There has been some heavy editing to the article by a single user. The current version is not a real improvement, and quite a lot important (even if not well- or systematically-phrased) content been deleted. I have left a note concerning this at the article's talk page under a message of the user,

4316:

and I are having a bit of a debate over how (or perhaps whether?) to define "person" in the opening sentence of the lede. I'm having a bit of trouble understanding exactly what point he is trying to make, and can't think of anything else to say in response that isn't just repeating myself, so I'm

3713:

Hey Wikipedians, I'm looking for advice on how I can help build up philosophy articles on Knowledge. I'm a bit lacking in inspiration, but am willing to help with both pesky cleanup, citation-hunting and the like. I've got access to a major academic library in the UK and have a Master's degree in

3399:

I agree that the term "layman" is a poor choice above. Generally speaking the best approach on Knowledge is to be very careful about assuming either high or low knowledge. Basically none of know each other. The rationality of your explanations is what Wikipedians will generally be looking at, not

3374:

I agree, the book doesn't seem too knowledgeable on the subject. So what I've done in the meantime is edit the page to reflect this, and removed the extraneous material on it so we can focus on the core issue. Posting here to get the attention of other people who care about the philosophy was the

1835:

Most of the article on consequentionalism is actually on teleological ethics. There are a number of quite drastic cuts and pastes, not to mention renames involved. And I haven't even named the question of correct information. So, my intent is to first select what exactly is teleology and separate

4816:

Should this discussion be copied to the article’s talk page? Here is a definition that deals with Pfhorrest’s initial talk page alien being, mind-merge, and fetus as partial person examples (which might be jokingly summed up as “3/5 of a Singularity that fell asleep”) – “an individuated unit of

4698:

What interests me most is actually the second part of the article (what counts as a person), but I would cast it in terms of the contemporary debates around personhood (rather than abstract thought-experiments), especially given that people will probably decide to search for the article based on

4405:

I think both Walkinxyz and I already agree that something generally like that is the correct approach; I'm honestly not entirely clear on where our disagreement lies, it seems to me like at least one of us is almost completely misunderstanding the other, which is why I'm hoping some outside eyes

1709:

By all means, mention the type/token distinction (perhaps not in the lede, though I have no strong opinion). But unless you can find a single citation that says "ontologically" a proposition is a concept, then you should drop this idiosyncratic presentation. (And even a single citation doesn't

397:

Is this then how we discuss among peers philosophers with whom we disagree? This homily presents a near perfect archetype of overweening bombast, delightfully shrill and quickened with the thrill of an emotional roller coaster, first stepping in "Bullsh*T" and then moving hysterically from the

4664:

I really appreciate that those working on Knowledge's philosophy project are taking an interest in this. I do agree that we have been spending a lot of time on the lead, and I would say for my part this is because it sets the context needed for the rest of the article, and there are substantial

2536:

I've just started to work on this featured article to try to bring it up to current FA standards, and to try to present the philosophical arguments for and against ID, preferably using uninvolved academic sources. It is an article with a troubled history because of the strong POVs involved. I'm

5187:

Yes I can put in a quick fix by using material from the SEP article. I will need to change the heading. I need to read the SEP article properly first, but this is interesting because of the highly methodological approach taken by the author. Having read some of it, I am now of the opinion that

2759:

article has been the subject of disagreement which does not appear to be going in any constructive direction. Since the three editors involved so far (I am one) are at loggerheads and one is now making 3RR noises at another, I implore other knowledgeable editors to advise. I strongly suggest

385:

With regard to feminism and phil: she appears ignorant of Emmy Noether at Bryn Mawr and has no mention of Susanne Langer among her mentions of Cassirer -even when talking about thought and symbol. See Heidegger in "Wegmarken" on Aristotle and physics. Compare Michael Oakeshott as a political

3820:

It looks like a hoax for more or less conclusive reasons: 1) Stephens is not mentioned as an author elsewhere; 2) Phrasing: "several philosophical and multi-cultural documents", "writing a hypothetical thesis"; 3) Quotation does not look 19th century to me; 4) Single referenced source without

398:

outrageous and obnoxious to the comical, to the simply comic and ignorant, until at last, it flatulently debunks. Clearly, your primary interests here are objectivity and scholarly inclusion of opposing views, but some might question whether your followers and fellows comprehend your irony. --

5053:

Thanks for reviewing the article. I would have rated it start class based on numerous subsections with only a single sentence. I could have written it without subsections, but I think each merits expansion. I actually read all of the sources to write the article. So when I read it, it is

3805:

be deleted because I am unable to verify it, the image is nothing to do with the ostensible subject, the single reference looks wrong, and the whole thing looks dodgy to me. I'd welcome someone either confirming that the article's subject is real, or confirming that the deletion proposal is

1731:

come on....I truely Belive that all knowleaged is impotant nomatter what the conscept or idea is. It is a vital part of our existace, with out the small things we cant have the bigger more complex things.... becuz..everything is made up from the same conscept, from that is were more idaes,

5146:

I would guess that Mackie is worth keeping (an excellent philosopher in my opinion) but I have not read his work on morals. Its the connection with the Philosophy of mathematics that I think must be wrong. The SEP article says only that Mackie was using (in the context of morals) the same

2787:

has been mostly neglected since it was first up in 2006. I have been able to add much to it, in the way of biographical data and listing his papers. However, detailing the significance of his body of work is somewhat beyond my expertise to handle. The content of sections "Medicine" and

174:

lacks a mathematical section. At least some reference to the existing articles on the mathematical side of the topic should be in order. Also, you might add to the existing sections what you find during your research, e.g. the psychology section lacks a remark on the historically relevant

3975:

article and discussion is not progressing well. A compromise should be possible, I think, but things are stuck with compromise proposals being reverted. I think third parties might be able to help a lot in order to bring some common sense and perspective to discussion. Does anyone have a

3351:

Yes GManNickG, I would hope so, and yet nobody has bothered to read my argument. In response to my argument the other user posted a link to the book in question. So if people are going to appeal to books, then those books must be subject to criticism. And that, my dear, is an awful

2504:

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as

2434:

2364:

2294:

4472:

The second thing is avoiding opening the article with something like " is contentious and difficult to define", as that sort of vague first sentence is reviled by certain circles here on Knowledge and I don't want to draw their ire. Instead I am aiming to do like we did at

4496:

That last point seems to be what Walkinxyz and I are both trying to do, but neither of us seems to like the other's attempt at is, and the discussion about what exactly we dislike and why seems to be getting murky so I'm hoping someone can glance over and try to clear it

4717:

it may be pointless in having an article which is not about one of the different senses of the term but attempting to be about all sneses simultanously. The assumtion/implication is that all senses of the term have something in common; is there any reason to make that

3718:, which I still contribute to. Is there anywhere I can list myself for potential mentoring or editing tasks or somewhere where people can put up "hunt me citations on x" type tasks that need access to academic libraries and databases related to philosophy? Sort of like 162:

I appreciate your initiative very much. I miss information on this particular perspective on the topic on Knowledge, as I did not have the time yet to actually get into in. I think that if you have a lot to contribute, you might start a new article, otherwise expanding

3780:: people chose to undergo useless and often directly harmful treatments, because 'doing nothing' (or in modern times, doing only treatments with proven efficacy) was intolerable. I'd like to be able to link to a relevant Knowledge article or two. Any suggestions? 868:

There is maybe an issue of whether the Frankfurt School proper is bounded in time and personal acquaintance, whether it continues to and beyond the "second generation" at University of Frankfurt? But if so, Honneth is a reasonable addition. More so, possibly, than

3625:

which I know I, for one, haven't been following consistently in terms of the information required (specifically the authors of each article, listed at the bottom of their pages). That should probably be noted somewhere w/ at least a link to that page. Thanks!

3375:

right thing to do, but keep in mind this is all within a day; you should give people time (several days) to get to the discussion and catch up before concluding nobody is reading it. :) In any case, I think this ends our meta-discussion, so I'll see you on the

4670:

Pfhorrest's idea that we make the opening a statement of what we can agree on, is a good one. And I am still trying to persuade him of the merits of my introductory description, because I think that he misinterpreted it originally and overreacted by changing

998:. Are there works that aren't also literature (which cannot merely be placed noncontroversially under literature)? The intention of the literature category originally was to contain all of this stuff. Is there some point to this before I make that proposal? 3145:

I can't imagine why Romanticism had its template removed. On the others, I tend to think the reverse: that psychoanalysis might well belong to philosophy of the mind, but the various psychoanalysis topics don't seem to need the categories/templates listed.

4605:

into a summary article with links would be one solution. However, if we want to produce an article that is comprehensible to people with no knowledge of philosophy and who might only be using English as a second language, then the task is more difficult.

4820:

MOS’s “define in first sentence” is a guideline. What goes in as the “definition” should be determined by the intended audience of the encyclopedia. A definition so technical that an ordinary user would be lost after one sentence has little value in an

808:

have a seemingly inferior logic that perhaps affects a larger selection of subsections. Those interested who are proficient in theology, philosophy and logic, might give a helping hand by assessing relevant subsections and giving comment at the talk page

368:

The view of Einstein as of 1905 on matter, energy and later on invariance is comical were it not that she is now viewed as a prophet of everything from ecology to animal rights (she uses the word creature, but was as anthropocentric as Heidegger.)

217:

However, if your ideas run into a completely different direction, don't let yourself be bothered by my remarks, your contribution is welcome - maybe my allusions just point in a helpful direction in case you run into certain aspects of the topic.

4988:

Thanks. I wrote this article because I never understood existentialism (or phenomenology), especially bad faith, and it's split of the "I" in the cogito argument. I witnessed an interesting hallway discussion about bad faith between ethicist

4997:, about bad faith (Fregean intentional contexts, etc.). I found a curious and interesting similar dicsussion in SEP's (mathamatical) realism article, which I summed up (with a sentence I don't really understand) - "Mathematical philosopher 2487:. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at 2417:. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at 2347:. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at 2277:. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at 3544:

The situation was sorted out like this: the computer science aspects are covered in an article "matesyntactic variable". The logical aspects are covered in "metavariable (logic)" which will probably be moved to "metavariable" shortly. Best

3420:

An anonymous editor; who is obviously a sockpuppet of the regular crowd that is hostile to the fields of philosophy, and logic insofar as philosophers study it; is on a campaign to remove "logic" as one of the relevant academic fields from

2924:

I agree with everything I understood, which was admittedly only about half of what you wrote. Maybe I'm just tired. In any case it doesn't look like anyone's pushing to keep the article, which does seem to wrongly redefine several terms.

1233:

I'm restarting this previously stillborn WikiProject. If you're interested, please join. There are still some very basic tasks which need doing, such as building the WikiProject page, and tagging core articles using the recently created

4609:

I was thinking that it might be possible to develop a template for cases such as this. My idea (which I have not worked through) would be to divide the articles into two sections based on the the distinction between connotation (sense,

4270:

had been discussed and supported without dissent for a long time without anything actually being done. Several editors were involved and no objections to the implemention of the merge have been raised by any of them, other than that of

5054:

intelligable to me. Were there other reasons for rating it start class? Is the article intelligable? Did I get the flow from one section to another correct, so that one leads into another, even though they are very diverse fields?

5347:

By the way, CRGreathouse and LogicalGregory, I put you both on my userpage "helpful editors" list. If you don't want your names out there, you have my permission to edit my user page and remove your names. Thanks to both of you.

3307:" is not a fallacy and incoherent as formulated. But he keeps insisting that it is on the grounds that some college writing book, produced by non-philosophers for high school students, lists it. See the discussion. What the hell? 853:) are already been widely discussed across Europe and I think he would soon be recognized worldwide for the same reason. I would've added it by myself but I want to wait for some other's opinions before proceeding with that. -- 4536:

it's been much work at all; just thinking and writing are easy and fun to do). So of course I would be happy to leave the lede as it stands; but I don't know how Walkinxyz would feel about that, since he dislikes it how it is.

361:

The article on Hannah Arendt's "The Human Condition" would be a case in point: we aappear to have a section on Chap VI which neglects to mention its outrageously biased, fallactious and otherwise obnoxious attack on science.

544:

if one simbolic notation were used consistantly and if that notation were documented sombrero. This problem is especialy confusing becuase logicians from diferent countries use different notation. 21:22, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

4783:

will only be one editor left for a consensus first sentence definition, "I" think (no internal debates, please). You might also want to consult the initial U.S. Consitution, where you can find out what 3/5 of a person is.

3204:. But I'm not suggesting putting phil of mind back in, just saying that I could see it being there. I'm much less sure about the psychoanalysis. What do reliable sources (e.g., Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) say? 2811:

that has been there since the GW Bush administration. I don't really know the difference (or if there even is a difference), so I'd appreciate if people who actually know something about Philosophy would comment on the

844:

I think that the name of Axel Honneth should be added in the template as the actual successor of Jürgen Habermas as the head of critical theory of Frankfurt School. Furter than being just the director in charge of the

4688:

What I would suggest is that the philosophy section in the person article cover the most salient division in the philosophical debates over personhood first – that is, the naturalistic-empiricist (i.e. Descartes -:

1638:

So, the cite does make the claim that a token of a proposition is a string of words, but this is true just because the author defines a proposition to be a kind of sentence and sentence tokens are strings of words.

1624:'s sole citation to justify his change in the lede does not say that a proposition is an idea, concept or abstraction. On the contrary, on p. 45 of the 1973 edition of Metalogic (as found on Google Books), we see: 521:

is small & of small scope. However, I think that it holds specific and useful information on that society. There the delete tag has been removed as well. So I just second your concerns ex post I guess. Best,

503:. I wonder if just the fact that these places have philosophical organizations is notable enough. Anyway, I would prefer to give these articles a chance, rather than have them deleted if possible. Any thoughts? 392:

Note: Isaiah Berlin both spoke Russian and knew Anna Akhmatova; cp Alasdair MaciIntyre's misrepresentation of Hilbert and a post for Noether in his book "Edith Stein". G. Robert Shiplett 18:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

245:

The issue of the law of excluded middle is definitely relevant, as it determines the divide between intuitionistic continua such as Brouwer's and Lawvere's, and classical ones such as Stevin's and Robinson's.

2727: 3935:

I'm not sure if this page is maintained manually or by bot, but it would be nice if these could be cleaned up -- disambiguation pages removed and replaced, as needed, by zero or more articles from that page.

1697:

The type/token distinction may well be an important notion when one discusses propositions, say. But it does not follow that the opening paragraph on an article about propositions should claim that they are

4545:, and we wouldn't want to duplicate the contents of those. I almost feel like this article should be renamed "Personhood" since that seems to be its main subject; and maybe put a summary-style article at 2902:

agnosticism/negative atheism. It assumes the spectrum of belief is a 1D line of theism-agnosticism-atheism, when it's really a 2D plane of belief-nonbelief and certainty-uncertainty. Hope that clarifies.

3665:

Note: that template shouldn't be used to cite/reference the SEP, only to link to it from the External links sections of articles (I wrote the template). BOK, I'd recommend adding as much information as

1570:

The type-token distinction and other meta-issues are important however. If people got the wrong idea, then deletion of the type-token distinction should be restored along with whatever agreed upon term.

929:, would also have to be included. However, I believe the "Frankfurt School" is mostly seen as referring to the earliest critical theorists and would hence exclude Honneth. Correct me if I'm wrong. -- 4520:

left as it for the moment and that a restructuring be undertaken on the body of the article? Perhaps when the body is improved and expanded it will be easier to see what the head should be like. --

1596:

Yes, the claim that a proposition is "an idea, concept or abstraction" is very odd to me. The competing lede (which claims that a proposition is either a sentence or the meaning of a sentence) is

379:

of Galileo's views is worse than that of Husserl, whose interest in phenomenology of Lebenswelt I, for one, otherwise share (here I see the influence of Heidegger and Fink on the aging Husserl.)

810: 3493:

A movenotice inviting discussion has been put up, suggesting to rename the article "metasyntactic variable" to "metavariable". Please see the discussion there and take part in the process.

4945:

Even a review under the Wikiproject and a rating of "start class" and "importance low" would help keep the RS content, instead of reverting again to the completely NRS "law only" version.

3519:

Movenotice has been up for about a month now, so anybody who took part in the discussion or is willing to contribute now please do now as the change should be made in near future. Best,

5026:

I'm not sure. While I have background in both math and philosophy, I have never studied the philosophy of mathematics. That quote seems much more about ethics, though, than bad faith

4214:

read on these topics, but you haven't noticed this? Please look at the titles of journal articles, chapters of books, etcetera and reconsider. Can anyone else given an amen here please?

3444:

is indeed mentioned on page 13. There (in the answer to exercise 7) it reads: "'A' and 'B' here are metalinguistic variables, belonging to the metalanguage of the language L." However,

2852:

correctly (as expected) notes it's not a stance of belief, but certainty. The neutralism article seems to fail to acknowledge that by assuming the spectrum of belief is theism<-: -->

2581: 5132:

it. (My friend, the founder and chief editor of SEP told me he (mostly) wrote that particular article, so its about time I actually read it.) Should I nix the whole section for now?

2857:

I don't understand what this position is attempting to clarify, and I think it should be removed; it's no different from an agnostic (weak) atheist, which is already covered. Thanks,

4768:

I have proposed a new structure for the main body of the Person "article". This is in a new section in the discussion page of "person". Hopefully this can start a group discussion.--

2469: 2399: 2329: 2259: 2184:

Looks really great! Are there any specific points I should judge? Btw: I think I am going to read "Some Remarks on Logical Form". Thanks for the list, which made me check it out! --

1836:

this from the consequentionalism. Then we can make an introduction to consequentionalism (utilism) and link to a more elaborate page if needs be. How well know are you in ethics? --

1551:

sentences (and indeed, whether such things as propositions even exist in the first place) is a hot area and is by no means settled. Can you provide a source to back this claim up?

805: 2897:

Thanks. What I meant was to expand on that the article supports itself as a position by defining atheism in a way that contradicts what we've (correctly) defined it to be in the

179:

in psychology (e.g. Lewin). Also, aspects of the philosophical viewpoint can spill over to the other sections, as e.g. conceptions of force/field/matter into the physics section.

4747:

A series of overlapping sets do not necessarily all have something in common, but they have more in common than a disjoint series. Finding a commonality is WP:OR and WP:Synth.

1536:

are accounted for). This, it seems to me to be eminently responsible. However this is diametrically opposed to the philosophy of these editors. It is demonstrably their goal to

1971: 1090: 1051: 1009: 5165:

Can you fix the sentence into something intelligable? I "wrote" it by essentially taking words out of the SEP article, which I believed was a correct procedure, but without

4028: 2672: 1366: 1330: 1207: 648: 450: 312: 4274:

raised above (but not on the Article's talk page). There is now an anonymous proposal to rename the article, but no reasons provided for that proposal; see discussion at

3647:, however it has not been through a formal process of approval by the group. I would love it if people would look it over and begin a discussion about it. There is also a 549: 3012:. This was done with the only explanation that it's "far better" known as this. I think this is wrong, but am not knowledgable enough to revert. Anyone wish to weigh in? 674:

series (four pages) should have the philosophers removed from them since they have their own list. It may make the series of pages short enough to be merged into one. --

4247:

I certainly haven't taken any action to counter philogo other than bringing it up on talk pages, so you are completely off base, and your comment requires explanation.

1496: 205:

comes to mind. (The context of} his philosophy draws heavily on the continuum hypothesis, even though not necessarily explicitly. In his "Briefings on Existence", the

94: 89: 84: 72: 67: 3621:

I initially wanted to ask where in WP:PHILO's manual of style (if any) is the proper citation form for websites like the SEP. I still do, but in looking I also note

4339:

and I know of a lot more that do not appear to be cited in the article. However, I have not had time to read the article properly and will get back to you later. --

947:

I also believe you are right concerning Helmut Reichelt. He seems to belong to the second/third generations of theorists. Perhaps it would be best to remove him. --

762: 59: 3743: 3577: 1444: 214:

to exist - the cognisability of actual infinity that Aristotle rejects connects here, also the principal (empirical) realisability of knowledge/sapient beings).

4929:"Mathematical philosopher Crispin Wright wrote that J.L. Mackie's view on mathematical realism relegates all discourse on ethics to only be about 'bad faith'." 412:

We can discuss like this, and it is comprehensible. However, I am not sure what's the aim of your comments regarding work on the article (which I assume is

372:

Her chapter VI could be used for a Phil 100 Logic class for tracing deliberate ambiguities, false dichotomies, non-sequitors and the use of false premises.

1161: 1137: 3425:. There is a credible, reliable source plainly supporting this fact which he or she is baldly ignoring. Any attention to the issue would be appreciated. 1688:

on a fundamental level. This is what we should be doing. It helps to avoid POV issues whn done correctly. This is why the meta-perspective is important.

5307:

One of my friends taught me that 'trick' long ago: "As long as I add, 'If I'm not mistaken' to everything I say, it's always right!". :)... I think. :)

3843:

I went ahead and boldly deleted it, since this seemed to me the likeliest way to avoid others wasting any more time on it. Morton Shumway (above) and

1119: 1820:

an article on teleological ethics, but now serves as a redirect to consequantialism. SO is the intent to recreate the teleological ethics article? -

5068:

It has a lot of sections because, as you said, they merit expansion. So the article has a long way to go, hence Start class. I don't think it's a

4462:

article to begin with, as at the time it began by stating that "A person is any particular human being" or some such, which is clearly non-neutral.

3573: 1772: 1452: 3929: 671: 416:). Contentwise, I agree with some of Mr. Shiplett's concerns, and the interesting info you give, but shouldn't this go into the article? Best, -- 1975: 3644: 3269: 1529: 4233: 1888:. The article is about the theory that Jesus of Nazareth did not, or probably did not, exist as an historical being. Should it be moved from 1258:, which is rated as mid-importance for this wikiproject, has passed FAC. This brings the total number of FA-class philosophy articles to 46. 518: 500: 375:

Her conflation of all relativisms with general relativity is not simply comic. This book has been assigned reading in colleges for decades.

47: 17: 3030: 4409:

An aside on this general approach though: I am trying to work within the constraints of some past discussions (to avoid re-igniting them).

3599: 2465: 2395: 2325: 2255: 234: 4036:

kerrzapp. But I've cited the sources for you to just grab the wikitext for, in the AFD discussion, so you can build upon what I've done.

3924:

The article index has a large number of links to disambiguation pages, most of which have few or no philosophical entries. For example,

358:

Anyone impressed with Harry Frankfurt's "Bullsh*T" should agree that our articles on recent philosophy books can be less than admirable.

5405:“Mackie's argument for the error-theory… (Mackie's) view is that, unless more is said, it simply relegates moral discourse to bad faith” 3353: 3314: 2146: 1371: 1335: 1095: 1056: 514: 496: 4416:

commonly use "human" and "person" synonymously, even though few if any sophisticated definition of personhood make that identification.

925:

left by the Frankfurt School. If the FS was synonymous with critical theory, then a lot of other theorists, including Axel Honneth and

5319: 5279: 5087: 5040: 4978: 4910: 4387: 3948: 3265: 3214: 3156: 2935: 2883: 2620: 2091: 2073: 1737: 785: 736: 4959:

I don't like doing this, but I've semi-protected the page. Hopefully this gives you some breathing room to get the article in order.

517:

quite alright (it has been worked out a bit since you posted this), and I find the deletion proposal tag removed. On the other hand,

4677:

do that. At the same time, the recent suggestion that it be merged with the "people" article goes too far in the opposite direction.

3722:

but with a bit less "hurr durr what's yer opinion?" questions and a few more things I might be able to productively help with? ;-) –

1979: 1356: 995: 445: 167:

might be a reasonable idea, as that article is a stub. Let me quickly point out to some aspects that I consider worthwhile covering.

3166:

I took a course in aesthetics (i.e philosophy of art, not interior design) and we did, in fact, study Freud, Lacan and things like

994:" category tree as it intersects with the philosophy category. I think I may propose to delete it, as it is completely the same as 5269:

Just that if you believe that moral judgments are false and you make them you're making intentionally false statements, I think.

3747: 3260:

a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for

3099: 440: 1941:

There is a yawning impasse with several editors warring over this inevitably vexed issue. As if JD were reminding us all of the

3854: 3581: 3113: 2016: 1160:

Greetings, everyone at WikiProject Philosophy! I am here to inform you that a proposal has been made to modify your barnstar,

4644:(Aside - Did you just say sinn=sense=connotation=meaning and beteutung=reference=denotation=instantiaion=concept=counts-as?) 4542: 3457:, yet it has to be acknowledged that the latter term is not used in logic, nor is it used by Hunter. Since the article is on 3091: 2846:. Are we to suppose "atheism" strictly refers to strong atheism and not simply a lack of belief when discussing agnosticism? 1227: 716:

A user has asked for more information about the Mayan conception of the infinite. I asked the user to move the discussion to

1485: 304: 5230:

Thanks for the help. The accuracy has been improved, but I still don't understand the concluding connection to bad faith.

4541:

I'm curious to hear what suggestions you have for improving the body. Bear in mind that we already have some articles like

3789: 3696: 3631: 3055: 1915: 1733: 1585: 1556: 1504: 1235: 846: 4665:

issues that need to be addressed in how such an important subject is thematized. For my part, I am learning a great deal.

3277: 3777: 2636:

The citations in this article are horrible. The two sources have never written anything before and are dubious at best.

1202: 991: 5169:

what I "wrote", like I was a Searle Chinese Room spitting out good Chinese without knowing Chinese. (In fact the whole

1320: 1205:

and its subcategories are currently nominated to be merged. Your comments are welcome, and the discussion can be found

3376: 3330: 3237:

I've done some work on the above just recently. Would someone like to re-grade it? I believe it is still on "Start".--

1177: 3905:

is not developing very well and is poorly written IMO compared to other "Criticism" articles. It needs help. Thanks.

1077: 4554:

Also, I'm not too familiar with how wikiprojects work but a part of me feels this discussion should be happening at

3990:

The debate covers a lot of ground, is there any particular issue that you would like third parties to comment on? --

3273: 2227:

I would like to second the request for outside involvement, and further request third opinions on our discussion at

1857:

Anyone want to try and rewrite this? It's shocking in it's current state, as far away from NPOV as you could get. --

3981: 3405: 3242: 3123: 2656: 2514: 2498: 2489: 2444: 2428: 2419: 2374: 2358: 2349: 2304: 2288: 2279: 1146: 717: 413: 38: 4885:

article needs help from any avaiable experienced editor; all bad faith in philosophy content was reverted twice.

4237: 4107: 2228: 2043: 837: 1479: 5221: 5193: 5156: 5115: 4773: 4628: 4525: 4364: 4344: 4284:

has been re-written; The body of the article requires editing to remove duplications, inconsistencies &c..

4195:

has been re-written; The body of the article requires editing to remove duplications, inconsistencies &c..

4076: 3995: 3879: 3830: 3719: 3692: 3627: 3554: 3528: 3502: 3478: 3095: 3085: 3051: 2813: 2175: 2115: 1851: 1780: 1581: 1552: 1500: 631: 616: 527: 479: 421: 335: 287: 230: 5357: 5342: 5324: 5299: 5284: 5239: 5225: 5211: 5197: 5182: 5173:

article suffers from the same problem, since I wrote it, it likely passes muster, but I don't understand it.)

5160: 5141: 5119: 5092: 5063: 5045: 5021: 4983: 4954: 4940: 4915: 4894: 4856: 4834: 4811: 4792: 4777: 4756: 4742: 4727: 4708: 4653: 4632: 4601:

As I said, I don't think there would be much of a problem if the article was just about philosophy, so making

4589: 4567: 4529: 4509: 4442: 4392: 4368: 4348: 4329: 4295: 4256: 4241: 4223: 4204: 4186: 4162: 4144: 4119: 4095: 4081: 4045: 4013: 3999: 3985: 3953: 3914: 3886: 3865: 3837: 3814: 3760: 3731: 3700: 3684: 3660: 3635: 3611: 3561: 3535: 3509: 3485: 3434: 3409: 3388: 3361: 3342: 3322: 3293: 3246: 3219: 3187: 3161: 3139: 3059: 3042: 3021: 2998: 2980: 2940: 2911: 2888: 2866: 2843: 2832: 2797: 2773: 2741: 2707: 2684: 2660: 2645: 2625: 2596: 2569: 2559: 2545: 2524: 2454: 2384: 2314: 2244: 2213: 2193: 2179: 2154: 2119: 2096: 2054: 2028: 1991: 1956: 1927: 1904: 1866: 1845: 1829: 1810: 1784: 1758: 1741: 1719: 1692: 1678: 1648: 1609: 1589: 1574: 1560: 1544: 1508: 1489: 1464: 1428: 1414: 1388: 1298: 1267: 1245: 1221: 1187: 1150: 1125: 1108: 1015: 1002: 977: 956: 938: 907: 886: 862: 826: 790: 769: 741: 703: 683: 660: 635: 620: 597: 556: 531: 507: 483: 460: 425: 407: 348: 324: 291: 273: 255: 238: 156: 133: 2565:

I believe the lead could definitely use a "less is more" approach. It hammers certain points over and over.

1702:

rather than the far commoner definition: they are kinds of sentences or the meanings of kinds of sentences.

4799: 4714: 3422: 3357: 3318: 3017: 2827: 2150: 1885: 1862: 1540:

any meta-perspective. This situation cannot stand. At some point we need to approve the MOS, and enforce it.

1410: 1263: 1038: 679: 279: 112: 2607: 5315: 5275: 5083: 5036: 4974: 4906: 4383: 4115: 3944: 3785: 3746:

and welcome. The best advise on how to help the project of improving philosophy articles is stated on the

3304: 3210: 3152: 2931: 2879: 2616: 2087: 1533: 952: 934: 858: 781: 732: 191: 3384: 3338: 2907: 2862: 2038:

Fresh eyes would be appreciated on an RfC about whether, in using in-text attribution for sources on the

456:

Nota bene: I proposed to merge these two categories so as to avoid unnecessary redundancy. Any thoughts?

3977: 3401: 3238: 3109: 3081: 2652: 2641: 2165: 1951: 1293: 1142: 696: 3802: 3676:

allows; this would perhaps exclude the address but that is rather useless in an online context anyway.

382:

Joceyln Benoist might be willing to do a reading from the view of post-Heidegger philosophy in France.

3448:

is the more common term (I find it—but not the former—in several encyclopedias of logic. I think that

2959:'s antisemitism that provoked an expression of shock and indignation on the part of the Frege scholar 2637: 1475: 5075:

Unfortunately I don't know anyone -- Knowledge or real life -- with background in philosophy of math.

5006: 4477:, and open with a statement of whatever narrow scraps of agreement there is between all parties, and 3727: 3592: 3310: 3073: 2703: 2555: 2506: 2436: 2366: 2296: 2209: 2189: 2069: 2039: 1987: 1841: 1806: 1183: 854: 594: 222: 198: 116: 3380: 3334: 2903: 2858: 2013: 691:

It will be done soon. The Philosobot proposal above includes a function to automatically update the

197:

3. Also to be considered relevant for philosophy proper, but of a mathematical flavour, is Cantor's

182:

2. Regarding philosophy proper, the concept of infinity is central. Aristotle's distinction between

5217: 5189: 5152: 5111: 4923:

the diff for the revert by Xxanthippie to the NRS and "no philosophy" version (with edit summary -

4867:

article needs help from any avaiable editor; all bad faith in philosophy content was reverted twice

4769: 4738: 4704: 4624: 4563: 4521: 4505: 4438: 4360: 4340: 4325: 4171: 4167: 4088: 4071: 4024: 3991: 3871: 3848: 3822: 3677: 3546: 3520: 3494: 3470: 3461:

I see no reason not to remove the reference to logic. The better solution however would be to make

2967:

on the part of a wikieditor who has persistenly blocked attempts to restore the Dummett quote, see

2808: 2769: 2240: 2171: 2136:

seems to have caused an edit war where one user has called for multiple bans despite the fact that

2111: 2024: 1776: 1280: 1273: 692: 627: 612: 523: 475: 417: 283: 226: 4317:

hoping perhaps someone here can lend an outside eye to our discussion and help move things along.

2476:(revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the 2406:(revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the 2336:(revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the 2266:(revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the 1669:

has a particular affection for labeling these syntactic objects thus. I'm sure I don't know why.

4890: 4252: 4219: 3910: 3902: 3756: 3656: 3430: 3183: 3135: 3038: 3013: 2968: 2817: 2592: 2530: 1889: 1881: 1873: 1858: 1754: 1532:

there is provision for attempting to cover the "meta-perspective" (i.e. distinctions such as the

1406: 1384: 1259: 1242: 1219: 1084: 1045: 675: 389:

See: philosophers as journalists versus philosophers an intellectuals. Arendt and the telescope.

261: 171: 164: 144: 1164:. You are invited to participate in the discussion! Thanks for taking time to read this notice. 1635:

expressing something true or false. It is an abstract thing; its tokens are strings of words."

5310: 5270: 5078: 5031: 4969: 4901: 4807: 4723: 4378: 4291: 4200: 4182: 4158: 4111: 4067: 4041: 4009: 3939: 3862: 3811: 3781: 3670: 3303:

How does quality control work here? I'm trying to convince some layperson that the so-called "

3205: 3147: 3009: 2926: 2874: 2793: 2784: 2611: 2566: 2521: 2501:. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th. 2451: 2431:. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th. 2381: 2361:. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th. 2311: 2291:. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th. 2082: 1893: 1525: 1460: 1255: 973: 948: 930: 776: 727: 403: 143:

Is the subject of the continuum a suitable topic for a separate page, or perhaps a section at

4406:

could look at our actual discussion and see if they can clarify for us what's going on there.

3453:

thing. It is understandable (for historical and social reasons) that both lemmas redirect to

2068:

could use some help... a lot of help, really. I'm not even sure where to classify it within

1916:

Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles#Knowledge:Requests_for_comment:Use_of_italics_in_article_titles

1580:

of agreement. Strawson at least preferred the term 'statement' to 'proposition' if I recall.

5106:

relegating moral discourse to bad faith”, but one might say that Mackie's arguments against

3257: 2994: 2976: 2719: 2680: 1947: 1715: 1674: 1644: 1605: 1399: 1285: 874: 873:

who has been placed into the Template as a Notable Theorist but is mentioned nowhere in the

818: 466:

Unless someone comes up with a technical and concise definition of the difference between a

269: 251: 152: 4336:

bookshelf: Puccetti, Persons; Williams, Problems of the Self; and Vesey, Personal identity.

2107: 4275: 4266: 4151: 4139: 4130: 3723: 3289: 2960: 2699: 2538: 2065: 2047: 1983: 1934: 1923: 1897: 1825: 1658: 1173: 918: 903: 882: 870: 752: 724:, but I'm not sure that the page is being watched since it's relatively new. Any takers? 656: 586: 320: 313:

Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_May_16#Category:Chinese_American_philosophers

206: 3264:

and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of

3281: 2076:

which is probably fine, though I don't think this is a particularly mathematical topic.

5395:

Truth in Ethics,” in B. Hooker (ed) Truth in Ethics (Oxford: Blackwell), pp. 1–18, 1996

5353: 5338: 5295: 5290:

I will add your " , I think" to my list of tools. Pretty tricky stuff, bad faith, huh?

5235: 5216:

Quick fix done. Phil of Math removed. Mackie put in context and linked to bad faith. --

5207: 5178: 5137: 5059: 5017: 4998: 4950: 4936: 4852: 4830: 4788: 4752: 4734: 4700: 4649: 4585: 4559: 4501: 4434: 4321: 4313: 3968: 3925: 3844: 3607: 3261: 3119: 2765: 2737: 2603: 2497:

and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at

2427:

and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at

2357:

and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at

2287:

and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at

2236: 2232: 1710:

suffice to change the lede, when countless authors use the already discussed meaning.)

1654: 1421: 926: 758: 365:

The chapter is founded in the views of Heidegger, which in the 1st ed. go unmentioned.

346: 120: 4994: 4990: 4886: 4271: 4248: 4229: 4215: 3906: 3752: 3652: 3426: 3179: 3171: 3131: 3034: 2956: 2588: 2224: 2142: 2137: 1750: 1689: 1666: 1621: 1571: 1541: 1380: 1239: 1212: 1198: 1122: 1105: 1012: 999: 766: 721: 700: 553: 504: 457: 4825:

oh well, I guess the definition will not apply to persons who are bodyless heads.)

4691:

Strawson, Parfit) and non-naturalist / phenomenological views (i.e. Heidegger -: -->

4232:, which I think can safely be interpreted to cover article categorization as well. 895:

I just noticed that Honneth was in the Template until an edit in January this year:

451:

Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_May_14#Category:Philosophical_societies

4803: 4719: 4287: 4196: 4178: 4154: 4063: 4037: 4005: 3858: 3807: 3691:

Thank you both for your (prompt!) responses; I'll look into cite-web for starters.

3648: 3167: 2789: 1456: 969: 833: 649:

Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_June_6#Category:Educational_philosophy

582: 399: 202: 124: 4433:"If any"? The Frankfurt essay on personhood mentions that in the first two pages! 2854:

atheism, which is incorrect and contradicts other pages (and correct definition).

2587:

I have proposed to move this redirect to "spiritualism" rather than "metaphysics."

2582:

Knowledge:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_September_19#Conduit_.28metaphysics.29

2494: 2424: 2390:

Philosophical literature articles have been selected for the Knowledge 0.8 release

2354: 2284: 4900:

Would you give a diff? There have been a *lot* of recent edits to that article.

3029:

I have no problem with the move. It does appear more prevalent in the literature:

1010:

Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_June_18#Category:Philosophical_works

643:

Proposed category merger: "Educational_philosophy" into "Philosophy of education"

5002: 4844: 4577: 4555: 4355:

To continue (I had to go to dinner), I suggest instead of talking about persons

4309: 3715: 3105: 2990: 2972: 2849: 2676: 2079:

Actually, even a good philosophical (not historical!) reference would be great.

2042:, we should include whether that source is an ordained minister or similar. See 1711: 1670: 1640: 1601: 1521: 1440: 814: 265: 247: 148: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

4281: 4192: 4175: 4134: 3972: 3960: 3285: 3230: 2756: 2551: 2205: 2185: 2009: 1919: 1837: 1821: 1802: 1166: 899: 878: 652: 604: 316: 5408: 5349: 5334: 5291: 5231: 5203: 5188:

Mackie's ideas on moral statements are important and well worth including.--

5174: 5170: 5133: 5055: 5013: 4946: 4932: 4882: 4864: 4848: 4826: 4784: 4748: 4645: 4581: 4474: 3603: 3200:

Of those, my aesthetics course (naturally, a philosophy class) covered only

2732: 2477: 2407: 2337: 2267: 1967: 578: 567: 339: 108: 1684:

object is to provide a precise and clear definition. It is telling readers

386:

thinker with views on modes of experience (her contemporary in many ways.)

2788:"Philosophy" existed before my contributions, and could use expertise. 4059: 4052: 2695: 2133: 2126: 3773:

I'm sure there's a name for preferring mistaken activity to inactivity.

3008:

The title of the article on the mind body dichotomy has been changed to

2898: 1662: 1448: 574: 563: 3622: 2320:

Epistemology articles have been selected for the Knowledge 0.8 release

1420:

Thank you for contributing the article; I have tidied it up somewhat.

4602: 4546: 4459: 4412:

The first thing is making sure to include a mention that many people

3469:(and ignore that lots of net culture people would be unhappy). Best, 3465:

the main article, have the other two link to it and add a section on

2747:

Major philosophers of the 20th Century on the main Philosophy article

2606:

about the name of the article. I think there's broad agreement that

2468:

for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were

2398:

for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were

2328:

for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were

2258:

for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were

1880:

Comments would be appreciated at an RfC about the best title for the

1197:

Hello, this is a notice for this WikiProject in regards to a current

5012:. Do you know who here might be able to explain what I just wrote? 2460:

Philosophy articles have been selected for the Knowledge 0.8 release

2250:

Aesthetics articles have been selected for the Knowledge 0.8 release

210:

accepted to exist (which is important in deciding about what can be

4580:

about the definition of person and outside help would be useful".

4455: 3776:

I'm thinking about this specifically in the context of historical

2761: 2728:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Jessica Rodriguez (3rd nomination)

2513:

to extend the reach of Knowledge worldwide. Please help us, with

2464:

Version 0.8 is a collection of Knowledge articles selected by the

2443:

to extend the reach of Knowledge worldwide. Please help us, with

2394:

Version 0.8 is a collection of Knowledge articles selected by the

2373:

to extend the reach of Knowledge worldwide. Please help us, with

2324:

Version 0.8 is a collection of Knowledge articles selected by the

2303:

to extend the reach of Knowledge worldwide. Please help us, with

2254:

Version 0.8 is a collection of Knowledge articles selected by the

2005: 1998: 5329:

I know I am not supposed to modify other editor's comments, but

4576:

Yep. Best to put there, and put here, "there is a discussion at

3602:

this post as the issue needs to be discussed in both quarters.__

3201: 3175: 2510: 2440: 2415:

Philosophical literature articles and revisionIDs we have chosen

2370: 2300: 1398:

Newly created article on U.S. Heidegger editor & translator

761:

to perform routine maintenance of some WikiProject pages. (See:

474:

in this context, I absolutely agree with your proposal. Best, --

5072:

article, just a lot less of article than it would (ideally) be.

3617:

Two questions on citing the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

3329:

I've fixed your link, and will continue this discussion on the

2164:

I've created a template for Wittgenstein, which can be seen at

849:

in Frankfurt, his ideas (above all those contained in his work

3178:. I don't really see to much relevance to phil of mind though. 2493:

with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's

2423:

with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's

2353:

with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's

2283:

with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's

2132:

A controversy over the definition of amorality in relation to

1343: 1307: 1104:

An editor from the mathematics department made this proposal.

1064: 1025: 25: 813:! Thank you for your attention, and otherwise happy editing! 495:

The following articles were proposed to be speedily deleted:

107:

Could we have a few editors take a look at recent changes to

5050:

I have the same math and phil but not much philmath problem.

1816:

I'm not quite sure which problem you are pointing to: there

1600:

more common in the literature, philosophical or otherwise.

190:

infinity is key, but also e.g. his exclusion of the middle (

3857:) both agreed with my assessment. Thanks for your input. 2752: 2231:, which appears to be closely related to his discussion at 1974:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 775:

Sounds good. Let me know if you need a hand with anything.

4693:

Frankfurt, Taylor). Then go into some more esoteric views.

4106:

I created a new BLP article on the communication Theorist

3440:

In the 1973 paper bound edition of Hunter's book the term

1447:). So I think it only just that the burden of working on 695:. There will also be a separate function for updating the 201:, and the later discussions in the context of set theory. 3580:

is a joint task-force/work-group of this WikiProject and

2550:

Might I ask which parts are in dispute of being a POV? --

2470:

selected based on their assessed importance and quality

2400:

selected based on their assessed importance and quality

2330:

selected based on their assessed importance and quality

2260:

selected based on their assessed importance and quality

1478:, in case anyone here would like to review this action. 5386:

Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, J.L. Mackie, (1977)

5330: 5151:

that Field had used in the philosophy of mathematics.--

4921: 4070:

for more information. Any help would be appreciated! --

3714:

philosophy, plus I've written some philosophy stuff at

2986: 2964: 1817: 896: 626:

The issue has been resolved, a revert has been done. --

4549:

with summaries of Personhood, Personal Identity, etc?

4481:

mention that the rest of the details are contentious.

2726:

Ongoing AFD deletion discussion for this article, at

2008:, an article of interest to this project. Please see 491:

Proposal to speedy delete Philosophical organizations

5202:

Thanks. I look forward to reading your take on it.

4843:

I'm copying this section over to be a subsection at

2675:. The article is said to be a part of this project. 2345:

Epistemology articles and revisionIDs we have chosen

2044:

Talk:Historicity_of_Jesus#RfC_on_in-text_attribution

3072:I am a little dubious about the recent removal by 2673:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Corporate behaviour

1910:

Italics permissible in titles of articles on books?

2842:I'm just bringing attention to the talk I started 2485:Philosophy articles and revisionIDs we have chosen 2275:Aesthetics articles and revisionIDs we have chosen 2223:As one of the other editors engaged with Faust on 4966:Please don't make me regret using my 'powers'. :) 3033:. However, be mindful to use proper title format. 806:Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences 5407:, Realism, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 4228:No "amen" but you would both do well to re-read 3299:Quality control, philosophical sources vs. other 3266:Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions 4265:The proposed merge was discussed and agreed at 4110:and additional assistance would be appreciated. 3959:Call for comments on recent debates concerning 2753:|"contemporary" (i.e., 20th century) philosophy 2713:AFD relevant to this project - Jessica Feshbach 1132:Bibliography about Intelligence for Wikipedians 763:Knowledge:Bots/Requests for approval/Philosobot 4798:If the term "person" is ambigous (as shown in 4713:If the term "person" is ambigous (as shown in 4102:Requesting help with Robert T. Craig (scholar) 1394:Please help on new item related to Heidegger!! 336:Template talk:Philosophy#Requested move (2010) 4618:). The first part to deal with what the word 2004:An editor has proposed a complete rewrite of 278:Thanks, I left a short note at the article's 8: 4125:Duplication of content and general confusion 921:", which could be seen as the philosophical 4276:Talk:Entailment#Move to logical consequence 1251:Confirmation bias is now a Featured Article 990:I am dubious about the value of the whole " 581:are distinct entities or should be merged. 5331:I could not resist modifying your last one 4454:A debate over that identification over at 2235:(in which I am not currently involved). -- 5110:relegates moral discourse to bad faith.-- 4058:Hello! I have been reviewing the article 1653:I see that the same phrase occurs on the 1120:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Nontheism 4925:"Reverted 45 edits by HkFnsNGA (talk); " 2803:merging practical argument with argument 1773:User:Morton Shumway/Proposition (Quotes) 573:There has been some question of whether 5379: 4847:, where additional comments should go. 3274:this project's listing in one big table 2483:We would like to ask you to review the 2413:We would like to ask you to review the 2343:We would like to ask you to review the 2273:We would like to ask you to review the 5010:relegates moral discourse to bad faith 4286:. IMHO this is the current priority. 4131:Talk:Entailment#Duplication of content 4019:Rapid attention and refactoring needed 3649:temple specifically for citing the SEP 2520:For the Knowledge 1.0 editorial team, 2450:For the Knowledge 1.0 editorial team, 2380:For the Knowledge 1.0 editorial team, 2310:For the Knowledge 1.0 editorial team, 1439:I've just discovered that I worked on 757:I have made a proposal to establish a 305:Category:Chinese_American_philosophers 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3967:There is a debate between myself and 1524:(more evidence of this phenomenon at 1515:Ongoing removal of philosophy content 519:Mississippi Philosophical Association 501:Mississippi Philosophical Association 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Philosophy 7: 4377:That seems like the right approach. 2807:There is a merge tag on the article 2168:if anyone would like to contribute. 3578:WikiProject Philosophy/Philosophers 1962:Max Weber - Featured article review 515:Caribbean Philosophical Association 497:Caribbean Philosophical Association 3930:Index of philosophy articles (I–Q) 3806:sensible. Thanks for listening. 3623:the SEP's preferred citation style 2074:Category:Philosophy of mathematics 672:Index of philosophy articles (A–C) 24: 3971:concerning several points on the 3801:I have just proposed the article 2985:Yesterday the editor in question 1474:I have just placed a prod tag on 1357:Category:Philosophy-related_lists 1321:Category:Philosophy_pages_by_type 1136:I have posted a bibliography of 996:Category:Philosophical_literature 446:Category:Philosophy_organizations 5370: 4872: 3598:template also then? I have also 3100:Category:Philosophical movements 1661:pages and was once added to the 1347: 1311: 1068: 1029: 1022:Category rename/change proposals 441:Category:Philosophical_societies 330:Proposed move of banner template 29: 4280:The lede of the merged article 4267:Talk:Entailment#Merger proposal 4191:The lede of the merged article 4152:Talk:Entailment#Merger proposal 4062:, which has been nominated for 3742:Please do add your name to the 3568:WPBiography work-group missing? 3114:Template:Continental philosophy 3004:Mind body dichotomy or problem? 2783:Need some help. The Wiki page 1700:ideas, concepts or abstractions 1364:You are encouraged to join the 1328:You are encouraged to join the 1088:You are encouraged to join the 1078:Category:English metaphysicians 1049:You are encouraged to join the 4543:Personal identity (philosophy) 3574:WikiProject Biography/Military 3510:10:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 3486:19:18, 26 September 2010 (UTC) 3435:23:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC) 3130:of aesthetics by philosophers. 2838:Purpose of agnostic neutralism 2762:|relevant Talk page discussion 2730:. Thank you for your time, -- 2646:19:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2626:01:23, 27 September 2010 (UTC) 2597:15:43, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2570:17:59, 23 September 2010 (UTC) 2525:23:28, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2455:23:28, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2385:22:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2315:00:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC) 2110:would be appreciated. Thanks. 1114:Proposed deletion of Nontheism 1083:deletion, merging, or renaming 1044:deletion, merging, or renaming 1: 4614:) and denotation (reference, 3887:01:16, 25 December 2010 (UTC) 3866:08:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC) 3838:03:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC) 3815:14:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC) 3790:20:45, 20 December 2010 (UTC) 3778:alternative cancer treatments 3761:04:09, 30 November 2010 (UTC) 3732:19:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC) 3701:20:18, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 3685:19:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 3661:19:37, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 3636:19:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 3612:22:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC) 3562:12:44, 20 November 2010 (UTC) 3410:09:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC) 3389:06:07, 17 November 2010 (UTC) 3362:05:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC) 3343:05:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC) 3323:04:27, 17 November 2010 (UTC) 3256:I have created together with 2987:compared Frege to Shakespeare 2576:Use of the term "metaphysics" 2560:08:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC) 2245:00:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC) 2214:07:57, 3 September 2010 (UTC) 2194:08:07, 9 September 2010 (UTC) 2155:15:22, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 2120:11:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC) 1236:Template:WikiProject Theology 847:Institute for Social Research 119:. The main discussion is at 5358:03:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC) 5343:19:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC) 5325:18:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC) 5300:18:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC) 5285:17:37, 4 February 2011 (UTC) 5240:15:54, 4 February 2011 (UTC) 5226:09:42, 4 February 2011 (UTC) 5212:07:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 5198:06:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 5183:05:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 5161:05:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 5142:03:21, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 5120:03:13, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 5093:00:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 5064:21:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 5046:17:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 5022:04:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 4984:03:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 4955:20:49, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 4941:20:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 4916:20:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 4895:07:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC) 4857:01:54, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 4835:01:16, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 4812:23:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC) 4793:21:37, 5 February 2011 (UTC) 4778:07:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC) 4757:01:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 4743:04:31, 19 January 2011 (UTC) 4728:03:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC) 4709:06:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC) 4654:01:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 4633:08:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC) 4590:01:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 4568:07:28, 17 January 2011 (UTC) 4530:05:30, 17 January 2011 (UTC) 4510:01:42, 17 January 2011 (UTC) 4443:06:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC) 4393:17:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC) 4369:12:46, 16 January 2011 (UTC) 4349:12:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC) 4330:03:47, 16 January 2011 (UTC) 4296:20:15, 5 February 2011 (UTC) 4257:20:31, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 4242:20:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 4224:19:54, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 4205:19:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC) 4187:11:49, 25 January 2011 (UTC) 4163:21:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC) 4145:19:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC) 4120:04:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 4096:16:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC) 4082:20:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC) 4046:14:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC) 4014:19:25, 26 January 2011 (UTC) 4004:What are the several points? 4000:02:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC) 3986:20:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC) 3920:Index of philosophy articles 3536:16:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC) 3294:20:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC) 3247:17:02, 6 November 2010 (UTC) 3220:21:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 3188:20:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 3162:19:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 3140:17:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 3060:00:49, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 3043:00:13, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 3022:22:24, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 2999:12:29, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 2981:21:25, 3 November 2010 (UTC) 2941:03:36, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 2912:02:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 2889:02:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 2867:04:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC) 2833:01:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC) 2798:11:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC) 2774:07:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC) 2742:09:37, 20 October 2010 (UTC) 2708:06:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC) 2685:15:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC) 2661:11:26, 17 October 2010 (UTC) 2010:Talk:Logos#Proposed Re-Write 1972:featured article review here 1495:PROD was removed, opened an 1403:work concerned Vietnam War. 1203:Category:Philosophical works 851:The Struggle for Recognition 666:Index of philosophy articles 5333:. Hope you don't mind. :) 5304:Oh, certainly tricky stuff. 3954:21:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC) 3915:19:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC) 3586:|philosopher-work-group=yes 3252:WikiProject cleanup listing 2546:15:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC) 2515:your WikiProject's feedback 2445:your WikiProject's feedback 2375:your WikiProject's feedback 2305:your WikiProject's feedback 2180:09:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 2097:01:10, 31 August 2010 (UTC) 2055:17:04, 26 August 2010 (UTC) 2029:13:21, 23 August 2010 (UTC) 1992:18:39, 14 August 2010 (UTC) 1957:06:16, 12 August 2010 (UTC) 1665:page. It seems to me that 548:You are correct! There are 264:, feel free to elaborate. 5426: 5368: 4870: 4458:is what brought me to the 3768: 3124:Template:Philosophy topics 2610:is an inappropriate name. 2499:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2495:articles with cleanup tags 2490:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2429:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2425:articles with cleanup tags 2420:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2359:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2355:articles with cleanup tags 2350:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2289:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2285:articles with cleanup tags 2280:Knowledge talk:Version 0.8 2034:RfC on in-text attribution 1928:18:36, 9 August 2010 (UTC) 1905:23:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC) 1008:I did make that proposal: 750: 718:Talk:Infinity (philosophy) 414:The Human Condition (book) 4108:Robert T. Craig (scholar) 3282:the index of WikiProjects 2632:Banality of Good and Evil 2229:Talk:Deontological ethics 2125:Edit-warring imminent at 1976:featured article criteria 1943:impossibility of the text 1867:20:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC) 1846:14:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC) 1830:14:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC) 1811:13:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC) 1785:14:38, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1759:21:32, 18 July 2010 (UTC) 1742:21:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC) 1720:19:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1693:17:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1679:03:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1649:02:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1610:02:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1590:18:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1575:17:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 1561:23:15, 15 June 2010 (UTC) 1545:21:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC) 1509:02:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC) 1490:12:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC) 1372:Categories for discussion 1336:Categories for discussion 1304:Categories for discussion 1151:21:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1126:19:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1109:18:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1096:Categories for discussion 1057:Categories for discussion 1016:22:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 978:19:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 957:08:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC) 939:19:46, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 908:09:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC) 887:09:16, 12 June 2010 (UTC) 838:Template:Frankfurt School 827:08:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC) 791:14:14, 14 June 2010 (UTC) 742:03:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC) 704:07:47, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 684:05:17, 13 June 2010 (UTC) 4278:As I said earlier above 3720:Knowledge:Reference Desk 3645:Manual of style of sorts 3584:. Should there not be a 3096:Category:Critical theory 1852:Three marks of existence 1749:I can't argue with that. 1734:GrimInsight NickHolcombe 1470:Portoesque logic prodded 1465:05:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC) 1429:06:52, 8 July 2010 (UTC) 1415:06:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC) 1389:20:19, 7 July 2010 (UTC) 1299:17:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC) 1268:12:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC) 1246:20:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 1222:21:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC) 1188:01:31, 1 July 2010 (UTC) 1003:22:58, 30 May 2010 (UTC) 863:10:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC) 770:05:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC) 661:22:35, 7 June 2010 (UTC) 636:11:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC) 621:01:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC) 603:Recent edits to article 598:00:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC) 557:22:23, 30 May 2010 (UTC) 532:16:51, 1 June 2010 (UTC) 508:21:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 484:16:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC) 461:22:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC) 426:17:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC) 408:05:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC) 349:13:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC) 325:17:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC) 292:17:04, 26 May 2010 (UTC) 274:13:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC) 256:09:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC) 239:02:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC) 157:16:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC) 4800:Person (disambiguation) 4715:Person (disambiguation) 3442:metalinguistic variable 3423:Metalinguistic variable 3416:Metalinguistic variable 1914:See the ongoing RfC at 1771:Maybe this is helpful: 1360:has been nominated for 1324:has been nominated for 1199:category for discussion 1193:Philosophical works CFD 1081:has been nominated for 1042:has been nominated for 1039:Category:Metaphysicians 747:Proposal for Philosobot 134:07:49, 7 May 2010 (UTC) 113:Metaphysics (Aristotle) 5128:. I will go back and 4993:, and, interestingly, 4690:Lock & Hume -: --> 4174:have been merged into 3467:metasyntactic variable 3459:metasyntactic variable 3455:metasyntactic variable 3450:metasyntactic variable 3305:bare assertion fallacy 2199:Morality and teleology 1534:type-token distinction 1138:Intelligence Citations 647:See the discussion at 550:Standards_for_notation 435:Proposal to merge cats 311:See the discussion at 192:Law of excluded middle 139:continuum (philosophy) 3582:WikiProject Biography 3110:Psychoanalytic theory 3092:Psychoanalytic theory 3082:Psychoanalytic theory 3068:Psychoanalytic theory 2853:agnosticism<-: --> 2751:The brief section on 2608:Conduit (metaphysics) 2511:Knowledge for Schools 2441:Knowledge for Schools 2371:Knowledge for Schools 2301:Knowledge for Schools 2102:Legalist vs. legalist 697:Index of philosophers 260:I added a section at 42:of past discussions. 5104:mathematical realism 5007:mathematical realism 4558:rather than here. -- 3270:the tool's wiki page 3074:User talk:Woland1234 2694:There is an article 2507:One Laptop per Child 2437:One Laptop per Child 2367:One Laptop per Child 2297:One Laptop per Child 2070:Category:Metaphysics 2040:Historicity of Jesus 1279:This project claims 1228:WikiProject Theology 583:Please weigh-in here 199:Continuum hypothesis 117:Corpus Aristotelicum 4692:Merlau-Ponty -: --> 4304:Defining personhood 4172:logical consequence 4168:logical implication 4025:Authenticity in art 3932:has 127 dab pages. 3709:Salut philosophers! 3693:BrideOfKripkenstein 3628:BrideOfKripkenstein 3052:BrideOfKripkenstein 2969:talk: Gottlob Frege 2809:Practical arguments 1886:the discussion here 1796:Teleological ethics 1582:BrideOfKripkenstein 1553:BrideOfKripkenstein 1528:). In the proposed 1501:BrideOfKripkenstein 1281:History of painting 1274:History of painting 693:Index of philosophy 354:The Human Condition 5124:It was a careless 4963:is even an issue!) 3903:Criticism of Islam 3898:Criticism of Islam 3588:parameter for the 3233:has been worked on 2531:Intelligent design 2466:Knowledge 1.0 team 2396:Knowledge 1.0 team 2326:Knowledge 1.0 team 2256:Knowledge 1.0 team 1890:Christ myth theory 1882:Christ myth theory 1874:Christ myth theory 797:Expert help needed 539:symbol consistency 262:continuum (theory) 172:Continuum (theory) 165:Continuum (theory) 145:continuum (theory) 5323: 5283: 5091: 5044: 4982: 4914: 4391: 4143: 3952: 3803:A Greater Paradox 3796:A Greater Paradox 3769:What's it called? 3748:main project page 3313:comment added by 3218: 3160: 3010:Mind-body problem 2939: 2887: 2825: 2785:Edmund Montgomery 2779:Edmund Montgomery 2624: 2544: 2141:read and post to 2095: 2053: 1966:I have nominated 1903: 1894:Jesus myth theory 1892:to, for example, 1526:Tautology (logic) 1378: 1377: 1342: 1341: 1296: 1256:Confirmation bias 1186: 1102: 1101: 1063: 1062: 789: 740: 242: 225:comment added by 132: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5417: 5410: 5402: 5396: 5393: 5387: 5384: 5374: 5373: 5313: 5273: 5149:type of argument 5081: 5034: 4972: 4904: 4876: 4875: 4500:Thanks again, -- 4381: 4137: 4093: 4092: 4079: 4074: 3978:Andrew Lancaster 3942: 3884: 3878: 3874: 3835: 3829: 3825: 3682: 3681: 3675: 3669: 3597: 3591: 3587: 3559: 3553: 3549: 3533: 3527: 3523: 3507: 3501: 3497: 3483: 3477: 3473: 3402:Andrew Lancaster 3325: 3239:Andrew Lancaster 3208: 3150: 2963:, also provoked 2929: 2877: 2830: 2823: 2822: 2720:Jessica Feshbach 2653:Andrew Lancaster 2651:which article?-- 2614: 2543: 2541: 2085: 2072:. It's also in 2052: 2050: 2020: 1902: 1900: 1482: 1476:Portoesque logic 1426: 1425: 1400:Jesse Glenn Gray 1351: 1350: 1344: 1315: 1314: 1308: 1294: 1291: 1288: 1238:. Many thanks ! 1217: 1182: 1180: 1169: 1143:WeijiBaikeBianji 1072: 1071: 1065: 1033: 1032: 1026: 875:Frankfurt School 823: 779: 730: 592: 344: 241: 219: 131: 129: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5425: 5424: 5420: 5419: 5418: 5416: 5415: 5414: 5413: 5403: 5399: 5394: 5390: 5385: 5381: 5377: 5376: 5371: 4879: 4878: 4873: 4869: 4306: 4234:166.205.136.251 4127: 4104: 4090: 4089: 4077: 4072: 4056: 4021: 3965: 3922: 3900: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3831: 3827: 3823: 3799: 3771: 3711: 3679: 3678: 3673: 3667: 3619: 3595: 3589: 3585: 3570: 3555: 3551: 3547: 3529: 3525: 3521: 3503: 3499: 3495: 3479: 3475: 3471: 3418: 3308: 3301: 3254: 3235: 3086:Critical theory 3070: 3006: 2961:Michael Dummett 2953: 2840: 2828: 2818: 2805: 2781: 2749: 2715: 2692: 2669: 2634: 2578: 2539: 2534: 2472:, then article 2462: 2402:, then article 2392: 2332:, then article 2322: 2262:, then article 2252: 2221: 2201: 2162: 2130: 2104: 2066:Actual infinity 2062: 2060:Actual infinity 2048: 2046:. Many thanks, 2036: 2021: 2018: 2002: 1964: 1939: 1935:Jacques Derrida 1912: 1898: 1878: 1855: 1798: 1659:Symbol (formal) 1517: 1480: 1472: 1437: 1423: 1422: 1396: 1348: 1312: 1306: 1289: 1286: 1284:appreciated. -- 1277: 1253: 1231: 1213: 1211:. Thank you. — 1201:. The category 1195: 1178: 1167: 1158: 1134: 1116: 1069: 1030: 1024: 988: 919:critical theory 871:Helmut Reichelt 842: 819: 799: 755: 753:User:Philosobot 749: 714: 668: 645: 608: 590: 571: 541: 493: 437: 356: 340: 332: 309: 220: 207:Axiom of choice 141: 125: 105: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5423: 5421: 5412: 5411: 5397: 5388: 5378: 5369: 5367: 5366: 5365: 5364: 5363: 5362: 5361: 5360: 5308: 5305: 5267: 5266: 5265: 5264: 5263: 5262: 5261: 5260: 5259: 5258: 5257: 5256: 5255: 5254: 5253: 5252: 5251: 5250: 5249: 5248: 5247: 5246: 5245: 5244: 5243: 5242: 5218:Logicalgregory 5190:Logicalgregory 5153:Logicalgregory 5112:Logicalgregory 5099: 5098: 5097: 5096: 5095: 5076: 5073: 5051: 4999:Crispin Wright 4967: 4964: 4960: 4871: 4868: 4861: 4860: 4859: 4840: 4839: 4838: 4837: 4822: 4818: 4770:Logicalgregory 4766: 4765: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4759: 4695: 4694: 4685: 4684: 4679: 4678: 4673: 4672: 4667: 4666: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4659: 4658: 4657: 4656: 4625:Logicalgregory 4599: 4598: 4597: 4596: 4595: 4594: 4593: 4592: 4551: 4550: 4538: 4537: 4522:Logicalgregory 4517: 4516: 4515: 4514: 4513: 4512: 4498: 4489: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4484: 4483: 4482: 4452: 4451: 4450: 4449: 4448: 4447: 4446: 4445: 4424: 4423: 4422: 4421: 4420: 4419: 4418: 4417: 4407: 4398: 4397: 4396: 4395: 4372: 4371: 4361:Logicalgregory 4352: 4351: 4341:Logicalgregory 4337: 4305: 4302: 4301: 4300: 4299: 4298: 4263: 4262: 4261: 4260: 4259: 4208: 4207: 4189: 4165: 4126: 4123: 4103: 4100: 4099: 4098: 4073:Tea with toast 4055: 4049: 4033: 4032: 4029:AfD discussion 4020: 4017: 3992:Logicalgregory 3969:User:271828182 3964: 3957: 3921: 3918: 3899: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3893: 3892: 3891: 3890: 3873:Morton Shumway 3824:Morton Shumway 3798: 3793: 3770: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3763: 3740: 3739:Greetings Tom, 3710: 3707: 3706: 3705: 3704: 3703: 3689: 3688: 3687: 3618: 3615: 3569: 3566: 3548:Morton Shumway 3542: 3541: 3540: 3539: 3522:Morton Shumway 3514: 3513: 3496:Morton Shumway 3490: 3489: 3472:Morton Shumway 3417: 3414: 3413: 3412: 3396: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3364: 3346: 3345: 3300: 3297: 3253: 3250: 3234: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3222: 3193: 3192: 3191: 3190: 3127: 3126: 3120:Psychoanalysis 3116: 3102: 3088: 3084:from category 3069: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3045: 3005: 3002: 2952: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2892: 2891: 2839: 2836: 2804: 2801: 2780: 2777: 2748: 2745: 2724: 2723: 2714: 2711: 2691: 2688: 2668: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2633: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2585: 2584: 2577: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2533: 2528: 2461: 2458: 2391: 2388: 2321: 2318: 2251: 2248: 2233:Talk:Teleology 2220: 2219:And deontology 2217: 2200: 2197: 2172:The Rhymesmith 2161: 2158: 2129: 2123: 2112:Anna Frodesiak 2103: 2100: 2061: 2058: 2035: 2032: 2017: 2001: 1995: 1963: 1960: 1938: 1931: 1911: 1908: 1877: 1870: 1854: 1849: 1833: 1832: 1797: 1794: 1793: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1777:Morton Shumway 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1707: 1655:Syntax (logic) 1651: 1636: 1625: 1620:I notice that 1615: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1564: 1563: 1520:their view at 1516: 1513: 1512: 1511: 1481:Sławomir Biały 1471: 1468: 1453:AfD discussion 1445:AfD discussion 1436: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1395: 1392: 1376: 1375: 1352: 1340: 1339: 1316: 1305: 1302: 1276: 1271: 1252: 1249: 1230: 1225: 1194: 1191: 1157: 1154: 1133: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1115: 1112: 1100: 1099: 1073: 1061: 1060: 1034: 1023: 1020: 1019: 1018: 987: 984: 983: 982: 981: 980: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 959: 942: 941: 927:Seyla Benhabib 911: 910: 890: 889: 841: 830: 798: 795: 794: 793: 748: 745: 713: 712:Mayan infinity 710: 709: 708: 707: 706: 667: 664: 644: 641: 640: 639: 628:Morton Shumway 613:Morton Shumway 607: 601: 570: 561: 560: 559: 540: 537: 536: 535: 524:Morton Shumway 513:By now I find 492: 489: 488: 487: 476:Morton Shumway 454: 453: 448: 443: 436: 433: 432: 431: 430: 429: 418:Morton Shumway 355: 352: 331: 328: 308: 302: 301: 300: 299: 298: 297: 296: 295: 294: 284:Morton Shumway 227:Morton Shumway 215: 195: 180: 177:field theories 168: 140: 137: 121:Talk:Aristotle 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5422: 5409: 5406: 5401: 5398: 5392: 5389: 5383: 5380: 5359: 5355: 5351: 5346: 5345: 5344: 5340: 5336: 5332: 5328: 5327: 5326: 5321: 5317: 5312: 5309: 5306: 5303: 5302: 5301: 5297: 5293: 5289: 5288: 5287: 5286: 5281: 5277: 5272: 5241: 5237: 5233: 5229: 5228: 5227: 5223: 5219: 5215: 5214: 5213: 5209: 5205: 5201: 5200: 5199: 5195: 5191: 5186: 5185: 5184: 5180: 5176: 5172: 5168: 5167:understanding 5164: 5163: 5162: 5158: 5154: 5150: 5145: 5144: 5143: 5139: 5135: 5131: 5127: 5123: 5122: 5121: 5117: 5113: 5109: 5108:moral realism 5105: 5100: 5094: 5089: 5085: 5080: 5077: 5074: 5071: 5067: 5066: 5065: 5061: 5057: 5052: 5049: 5048: 5047: 5042: 5038: 5033: 5029: 5025: 5024: 5023: 5019: 5015: 5011: 5008: 5004: 5000: 4996: 4995:Alonzo Church 4992: 4991:Philippa Foot 4987: 4986: 4985: 4980: 4976: 4971: 4968: 4965: 4961: 4958: 4957: 4956: 4952: 4948: 4944: 4943: 4942: 4938: 4934: 4930: 4926: 4922: 4919: 4918: 4917: 4912: 4908: 4903: 4899: 4898: 4897: 4896: 4892: 4888: 4884: 4866: 4862: 4858: 4854: 4850: 4846: 4842: 4841: 4836: 4832: 4828: 4823: 4821:encyclopedia. 4819: 4815: 4814: 4813: 4809: 4805: 4801: 4797: 4796: 4795: 4794: 4790: 4786: 4780: 4779: 4775: 4771: 4758: 4754: 4750: 4746: 4745: 4744: 4740: 4736: 4731: 4730: 4729: 4725: 4721: 4716: 4712: 4711: 4710: 4706: 4702: 4697: 4696: 4687: 4686: 4681: 4680: 4675: 4674: 4669: 4668: 4663: 4655: 4651: 4647: 4643: 4642: 4641: 4640: 4639: 4638: 4637: 4636: 4635: 4634: 4630: 4626: 4621: 4617: 4613: 4607: 4604: 4591: 4587: 4583: 4579: 4575: 4574: 4573: 4572: 4571: 4570: 4569: 4565: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4552: 4548: 4544: 4540: 4539: 4534: 4533: 4532: 4531: 4527: 4523: 4511: 4507: 4503: 4499: 4495: 4494: 4493: 4492: 4491: 4490: 4480: 4476: 4471: 4470: 4469: 4468: 4467: 4466: 4465: 4464: 4463: 4461: 4457: 4444: 4440: 4436: 4432: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4426: 4425: 4415: 4411: 4410: 4408: 4404: 4403: 4402: 4401: 4400: 4399: 4394: 4389: 4385: 4380: 4376: 4375: 4374: 4373: 4370: 4366: 4362: 4358: 4354: 4353: 4350: 4346: 4342: 4338: 4334: 4333: 4332: 4331: 4327: 4323: 4318: 4315: 4311: 4303: 4297: 4293: 4289: 4285: 4283: 4277: 4273: 4268: 4264: 4258: 4254: 4250: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4239: 4235: 4231: 4227: 4226: 4225: 4221: 4217: 4212: 4211: 4210: 4209: 4206: 4202: 4198: 4194: 4190: 4188: 4184: 4180: 4177: 4173: 4169: 4166: 4164: 4160: 4156: 4153: 4149: 4148: 4147: 4146: 4141: 4136: 4132: 4124: 4122: 4121: 4117: 4113: 4109: 4101: 4097: 4094: 4086: 4085: 4084: 4083: 4080: 4075: 4069: 4065: 4061: 4054: 4051:GA review of 4050: 4048: 4047: 4043: 4039: 4030: 4026: 4023: 4022: 4018: 4016: 4015: 4011: 4007: 4002: 4001: 3997: 3993: 3988: 3987: 3983: 3979: 3974: 3970: 3962: 3958: 3956: 3955: 3950: 3946: 3941: 3937: 3933: 3931: 3927: 3919: 3917: 3916: 3912: 3908: 3904: 3897: 3888: 3885: 3883: 3875: 3869: 3868: 3867: 3864: 3860: 3856: 3853: 3850: 3846: 3842: 3841: 3839: 3836: 3834: 3826: 3819: 3818: 3817: 3816: 3813: 3809: 3804: 3797: 3794: 3792: 3791: 3787: 3783: 3779: 3774: 3762: 3758: 3754: 3749: 3745: 3741: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3735: 3734: 3733: 3729: 3725: 3721: 3717: 3708: 3702: 3698: 3694: 3690: 3686: 3683: 3672: 3664: 3663: 3662: 3658: 3654: 3650: 3646: 3643:We do have a 3642: 3641: 3640: 3639: 3638: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3624: 3616: 3614: 3613: 3609: 3605: 3601: 3594: 3583: 3579: 3575: 3567: 3565: 3563: 3560: 3558: 3550: 3537: 3534: 3532: 3524: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3515: 3511: 3508: 3506: 3498: 3492: 3491: 3487: 3484: 3482: 3474: 3468: 3464: 3460: 3456: 3451: 3447: 3443: 3439: 3438: 3437: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3424: 3415: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3398: 3397: 3390: 3386: 3382: 3378: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3368: 3363: 3359: 3355: 3354:99.231.217.26 3350: 3349: 3348: 3347: 3344: 3340: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3324: 3320: 3316: 3315:99.231.217.26 3312: 3306: 3298: 3296: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3283: 3279: 3278:by categories 3275: 3271: 3267: 3263: 3259: 3251: 3249: 3248: 3244: 3240: 3232: 3229: 3221: 3216: 3212: 3207: 3203: 3199: 3198: 3197: 3196: 3195: 3194: 3189: 3185: 3181: 3177: 3173: 3172:Objet petit a 3169: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3158: 3154: 3149: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3137: 3133: 3125: 3121: 3117: 3115: 3111: 3107: 3103: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3075: 3067: 3061: 3057: 3053: 3049: 3046: 3044: 3040: 3036: 3032: 3028: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3023: 3019: 3015: 3014:BashBrannigan 3011: 3003: 3001: 3000: 2996: 2992: 2988: 2983: 2982: 2978: 2974: 2970: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2957:Gottlob Frege 2955:The facts of 2950: 2942: 2937: 2933: 2928: 2923: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2913: 2909: 2905: 2900: 2896: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2890: 2885: 2881: 2876: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2855: 2851: 2847: 2845: 2837: 2835: 2834: 2831: 2826: 2821: 2815: 2810: 2802: 2800: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2786: 2778: 2776: 2775: 2771: 2767: 2763: 2758: 2754: 2746: 2744: 2743: 2739: 2735: 2734: 2729: 2722: 2721: 2717: 2716: 2712: 2710: 2709: 2705: 2701: 2697: 2689: 2687: 2686: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2666: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2643: 2639: 2631: 2627: 2622: 2618: 2613: 2609: 2605: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2598: 2594: 2590: 2583: 2580: 2579: 2575: 2571: 2568: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2557: 2553: 2548: 2547: 2542: 2532: 2529: 2527: 2526: 2523: 2518: 2516: 2512: 2508: 2502: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2491: 2486: 2481: 2479: 2475: 2471: 2467: 2459: 2457: 2456: 2453: 2448: 2446: 2442: 2438: 2432: 2430: 2426: 2422: 2421: 2416: 2411: 2409: 2405: 2401: 2397: 2389: 2387: 2386: 2383: 2378: 2376: 2372: 2368: 2362: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2351: 2346: 2341: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2327: 2319: 2317: 2316: 2313: 2308: 2306: 2302: 2298: 2292: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2281: 2276: 2271: 2269: 2265: 2261: 2257: 2249: 2247: 2246: 2242: 2238: 2234: 2230: 2226: 2225:Talk:Morality 2218: 2216: 2215: 2211: 2207: 2198: 2196: 2195: 2191: 2187: 2182: 2181: 2177: 2173: 2169: 2167: 2159: 2157: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2147:173.58.234.86 2144: 2143:Talk:Morality 2139: 2135: 2128: 2124: 2122: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2109: 2106:Any views on 2101: 2099: 2098: 2093: 2089: 2084: 2080: 2077: 2075: 2071: 2067: 2059: 2057: 2056: 2051: 2045: 2041: 2033: 2031: 2030: 2026: 2022: 2015: 2011: 2007: 2000: 1996: 1994: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1981: 1977: 1973: 1969: 1961: 1959: 1958: 1955: 1953: 1949: 1944: 1936: 1932: 1930: 1929: 1925: 1921: 1917: 1909: 1907: 1906: 1901: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1875: 1871: 1869: 1868: 1864: 1860: 1859:Cameron Scott 1853: 1850: 1848: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1831: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1808: 1804: 1795: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1760: 1756: 1752: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1739: 1735: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1708: 1705: 1701: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1691: 1687: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1656: 1652: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1637: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1623: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1611: 1607: 1603: 1599: 1595: 1591: 1587: 1583: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1573: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1562: 1558: 1554: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1543: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1523: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1477: 1469: 1467: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1450: 1446: 1442: 1434: 1430: 1427: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1412: 1408: 1407:Calamitybrook 1404: 1401: 1393: 1391: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1373: 1369: 1368: 1363: 1359: 1358: 1353: 1346: 1345: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1327: 1323: 1322: 1317: 1310: 1309: 1303: 1301: 1300: 1297: 1292: 1282: 1275: 1272: 1270: 1269: 1265: 1261: 1260:MartinPoulter 1257: 1250: 1248: 1247: 1244: 1241: 1237: 1229: 1226: 1224: 1223: 1220: 1218: 1216: 1210: 1209: 1204: 1200: 1192: 1190: 1189: 1185: 1181: 1176: 1175: 1171: 1170: 1163: 1155: 1153: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1139: 1131: 1127: 1124: 1121: 1118: 1117: 1113: 1111: 1110: 1107: 1097: 1093: 1092: 1087: 1086: 1080: 1079: 1074: 1067: 1066: 1058: 1054: 1053: 1048: 1047: 1041: 1040: 1035: 1028: 1027: 1021: 1017: 1014: 1011: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 1001: 997: 993: 985: 979: 975: 971: 966: 965: 958: 954: 950: 946: 945: 944: 943: 940: 936: 932: 928: 924: 920: 915: 914: 913: 912: 909: 905: 901: 897: 894: 893: 892: 891: 888: 884: 880: 876: 872: 867: 866: 865: 864: 860: 856: 852: 848: 839: 835: 831: 829: 828: 824: 822: 816: 812: 807: 803: 796: 792: 787: 783: 778: 774: 773: 772: 771: 768: 764: 760: 754: 746: 744: 743: 738: 734: 729: 725: 723: 722:Talk:Infinity 719: 711: 705: 702: 698: 694: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 681: 677: 676:Alan Liefting 673: 665: 663: 662: 658: 654: 650: 642: 637: 633: 629: 625: 624: 623: 622: 618: 614: 606: 602: 600: 599: 596: 593: 589: 584: 580: 576: 569: 565: 562: 558: 555: 551: 547: 546: 545: 538: 533: 529: 525: 520: 516: 512: 511: 510: 509: 506: 502: 498: 490: 485: 481: 477: 473: 469: 465: 464: 463: 462: 459: 452: 449: 447: 444: 442: 439: 438: 434: 427: 423: 419: 415: 411: 410: 409: 405: 401: 396: 395: 394: 390: 387: 383: 380: 376: 373: 370: 366: 363: 359: 353: 351: 350: 347: 345: 343: 337: 329: 327: 326: 322: 318: 314: 306: 303: 293: 289: 285: 281: 277: 276: 275: 271: 267: 263: 259: 258: 257: 253: 249: 244: 243: 240: 236: 232: 228: 224: 216: 213: 208: 204: 200: 196: 193: 189: 185: 181: 178: 173: 169: 166: 161: 160: 159: 158: 154: 150: 146: 138: 136: 135: 130: 128: 122: 118: 114: 110: 102: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5404: 5400: 5391: 5382: 5311:CRGreathouse 5271:CRGreathouse 5268: 5166: 5148: 5129: 5125: 5107: 5103: 5079:CRGreathouse 5069: 5032:CRGreathouse 5027: 5009: 4970:CRGreathouse 4928: 4924: 4902:CRGreathouse 4880: 4781: 4767: 4619: 4615: 4611: 4608: 4600: 4518: 4478: 4453: 4413: 4379:CRGreathouse 4356: 4319: 4307: 4279: 4128: 4112:Coffeepusher 4105: 4057: 4034: 4003: 3989: 3966: 3940:CRGreathouse 3938: 3934: 3923: 3901: 3881: 3851: 3832: 3800: 3795: 3782:WhatamIdoing 3775: 3772: 3712: 3620: 3571: 3556: 3543: 3530: 3504: 3480: 3466: 3463:metavariable 3462: 3458: 3454: 3449: 3446:metavariable 3445: 3441: 3419: 3302: 3255: 3236: 3206:CRGreathouse 3168:anamorphosis 3148:CRGreathouse 3128: 3071: 3047: 3007: 2984: 2954: 2927:CRGreathouse 2875:CRGreathouse 2856: 2848: 2841: 2819: 2806: 2782: 2760:reading the 2755:in the main 2750: 2731: 2725: 2718: 2693: 2671:Please see: 2670: 2635: 2612:CRGreathouse 2586: 2567:Sχeptomaniac 2549: 2535: 2522:SelectionBot 2519: 2503: 2488: 2482: 2473: 2463: 2452:SelectionBot 2449: 2433: 2418: 2412: 2403: 2393: 2382:SelectionBot 2379: 2363: 2348: 2342: 2333: 2323: 2312:SelectionBot 2309: 2293: 2278: 2272: 2263: 2253: 2222: 2202: 2183: 2170: 2163: 2160:Wittgenstein 2145:. Thanks. -- 2131: 2105: 2083:CRGreathouse 2081: 2078: 2064:The article 2063: 2037: 2003: 1965: 1946: 1942: 1940: 1937:lead section 1913: 1879: 1856: 1834: 1799: 1730: 1706:is my point. 1703: 1699: 1685: 1632: 1628: 1597: 1537: 1518: 1473: 1438: 1405: 1397: 1379: 1365: 1361: 1355: 1354:The related 1329: 1325: 1319: 1318:The related 1278: 1254: 1232: 1214: 1206: 1196: 1172: 1165: 1159: 1135: 1103: 1089: 1082: 1076: 1075:The related 1050: 1043: 1037: 1036:The related 989: 949:m3taphysical 931:m3taphysical 922: 850: 843: 834:Axel Honneth 820: 804:sections in 801: 800: 777:CRGreathouse 756: 728:CRGreathouse 726: 720:rather than 715: 669: 646: 609: 587: 572: 542: 494: 472:organisation 471: 467: 455: 391: 388: 384: 381: 377: 374: 371: 367: 364: 360: 357: 341: 333: 310: 211: 203:Alain Badiou 187: 183: 176: 142: 126: 123:. Thanks -- 106: 78: 43: 37: 5005:'s view on 5003:J.L. Mackie 5001:wrote that 4845:Talk:Person 4718:assumption? 4578:Talk:Person 4556:Talk:Person 4310:Talk:Person 4129:Please see 4087:Addressed. 4068:review page 3716:Citizendium 3600:crossposted 3593:WPBiography 3572:Similar to 3309:—Preceding 3258:Smallman12q 3106:Romanticism 3090:Category 2850:Agnosticism 2764:. Thanks. 2638:Judderwocky 2602:I've asked 2480:algorithm. 2410:algorithm. 2340:algorithm. 2270:algorithm. 1948:Artiquities 1629:proposition 1522:Proposition 1441:Fan loyalty 751:Main page: 221:—Preceding 36:This is an 4320:Thanks. -- 4282:Entailment 4193:Entailment 4176:Entailment 3973:Philosophy 3961:Philosophy 3928:says that 3724:Tom Morris 3400:your CV.-- 3231:The Prince 2829:Talk to me 2816:. Thanks, 2757:Philosophy 2700:Squidonius 2540:SlimVirgin 2049:SlimVirgin 1899:SlimVirgin 1686:what it is 1367:discussion 1331:discussion 1091:discussion 1052:discussion 855:VentDuNord 605:Perception 95:Archive 15 90:Archive 14 85:Archive 13 79:Archive 12 73:Archive 11 68:Archive 10 5171:bad faith 4883:Bad faith 4865:Bad faith 4735:Walkinxyz 4701:Walkinxyz 4616:bedeutung 4560:Pfhorrest 4502:Pfhorrest 4475:Free will 4435:Walkinxyz 4322:Pfhorrest 4314:Walkinxyz 4272:Greg Bard 4249:Greg Bard 4216:Greg Bard 4091:Skomorokh 3976:moment?-- 3845:Antandrus 3753:Greg Bard 3680:Skomorokh 3653:Greg Bard 3427:Greg Bard 3381:GManNickG 3377:talk page 3335:GManNickG 3331:talk page 3262:WolterBot 3180:Greg Bard 3132:Greg Bard 3104:Articles 3035:Greg Bard 2904:GManNickG 2859:GManNickG 2820:D O N D E 2814:talk page 2766:271828182 2589:Greg Bard 2478:WikiTrust 2408:WikiTrust 2338:WikiTrust 2268:WikiTrust 2237:Pfhorrest 1968:Max Weber 1933:Edit war 1876:page name 1751:Greg Bard 1690:Greg Bard 1667:Greg Bard 1631:... is a 1622:Greg Bard 1572:Greg Bard 1542:Greg Bard 1424:Skomorokh 1381:Greg Bard 1326:upmerging 1123:Greg Bard 1106:Greg Bard 1013:Greg Bard 1000:Greg Bard 923:tradition 877:article. 767:Greg Bard 701:Greg Bard 579:Nontheism 568:Nontheism 554:Greg Bard 505:Greg Bard 458:Greg Bard 280:talk page 188:potential 109:Aristotle 103:Aristotle 60:Archive 5 5375:Resolved 5126:skimming 4887:HkFnsNGA 4877:Resolved 4308:Over at 4060:Stoicism 4053:Stoicism 3926:dablinks 3907:Student7 3870:Thanks! 3855:contribs 3671:cite web 3311:unsigned 3118:Article 3080:Article 2873:for it. 2824:groovily 2696:God gene 2690:God gene 2474:versions 2404:versions 2334:versions 2264:versions 2134:morality 2127:Morality 2014:Radagast 1633:sentence 1362:renaming 1240:Claritas 1156:Barnstar 832:add for 817:dixit. ( 235:contribs 223:unsigned 4931:means. 4804:Philogo 4720:Philogo 4312:, user 4288:Philogo 4197:Philogo 4179:Philogo 4155:Philogo 4038:Uncle G 4006:Philogo 3963:article 3859:RobertG 3808:RobertG 3268:). See 3048:Comment 2899:atheism 2790:Maile66 2604:WP:PARA 1997:RfC on 1872:RfC on 1663:Theorem 1457:Uncle G 1449:Loyalty 1435:Loyalty 1370:on the 1334:on the 1094:on the 1055:on the 970:ejvindh 575:Atheism 564:Atheism 470:and an 468:society 400:Devala1 127:Snowded 39:archive 5028:per se 4920:Here's 4620:person 4603:Person 4547:Person 4460:Person 4357:per sa 4230:WP:OWN 4078:(talk) 3744:roster 3031:google 2991:Tkuvho 2973:Tkuvho 2965:a yawn 2677:Borock 2138:WP:3RR 1970:for a 1884:. See 1712:Phiwum 1671:Phiwum 1641:Phiwum 1602:Phiwum 1538:remove 1287:auburn 1174:Voting 1168:Kayau 917:with " 815:Rursus 595:(talk) 307:at CfD 266:Tkuvho 248:Tkuvho 184:actual 149:Tkuvho 4456:Human 4135:dcljr 3352:book. 3286:Svick 3122:from 3112:from 3094:from 2951:Frege 2552:Faust 2206:Faust 2186:Faust 2012:. -- 2006:Logos 1999:Logos 1984:Tom B 1920:Wareh 1838:Faust 1822:Bilby 1803:Faust 1374:page. 1338:page. 1290:pilot 1098:page. 1059:page. 992:works 986:Works 900:AllyD 879:AllyD 802:A few 653:AllyD 591:cobra 588:Cyber 317:AllyD 212:known 186:and 16:< 5354:talk 5350:PPdd 5339:talk 5335:PPdd 5296:talk 5292:PPdd 5236:talk 5232:PPdd 5222:talk 5208:talk 5204:PPdd 5194:talk 5179:talk 5175:PPdd 5157:talk 5138:talk 5134:PPdd 5130:read 5116:talk 5060:talk 5056:PPdd 5018:talk 5014:PPdd 4951:talk 4947:PPdd 4937:talk 4933:PPdd 4891:talk 4881:The 4863:The 4853:talk 4849:PPdd 4831:talk 4827:PPdd 4808:talk 4789:talk 4785:PPdd 4774:talk 4753:talk 4749:PPdd 4739:talk 4724:talk 4705:talk 4650:talk 4646:PPdd 4629:talk 4612:sinn 4586:talk 4582:PPdd 4564:talk 4526:talk 4506:talk 4479:then 4439:talk 4365:talk 4345:talk 4326:talk 4292:talk 4253:talk 4238:talk 4220:talk 4201:talk 4183:talk 4170:and 4159:talk 4150:See 4140:talk 4133:. - 4116:talk 4042:talk 4010:talk 3996:talk 3982:talk 3911:talk 3882:talk 3863:talk 3849:talk 3833:talk 3812:talk 3786:talk 3757:talk 3728:talk 3697:talk 3657:talk 3632:talk 3608:talk 3604:meco 3557:talk 3531:talk 3505:talk 3481:talk 3431:talk 3406:talk 3385:talk 3358:talk 3339:talk 3319:talk 3290:talk 3280:and 3243:talk 3202:gaze 3184:talk 3176:gaze 3174:and 3136:talk 3108:and 3098:and 3076:of 3056:talk 3039:talk 3018:talk 2995:talk 2977:talk 2908:talk 2863:talk 2844:here 2794:talk 2770:talk 2738:talk 2733:Cirt 2704:talk 2681:talk 2657:talk 2642:talk 2593:talk 2556:talk 2509:and 2439:and 2369:and 2299:and 2241:talk 2210:talk 2190:talk 2176:talk 2166:here 2151:talk 2116:talk 2108:this 2025:talk 1988:talk 1980:here 1952:talk 1924:talk 1863:talk 1842:talk 1826:talk 1807:talk 1781:talk 1775:. -- 1755:talk 1738:talk 1716:talk 1704:This 1675:talk 1657:and 1645:talk 1606:talk 1598:much 1586:talk 1557:talk 1505:talk 1486:talk 1461:talk 1411:talk 1385:talk 1295:talk 1264:talk 1208:here 1184:evil 1162:here 1147:talk 974:talk 953:talk 935:talk 904:talk 883:talk 859:talk 821:bork 811:HERE 682:) - 680:talk 670:The 657:talk 632:talk 617:talk 585:. -- 577:and 528:talk 480:talk 422:talk 404:talk 342:xeno 334:See 321:talk 288:talk 282:. -- 270:talk 252:talk 231:talk 153:talk 115:and 5070:bad 4689:--> 4683:in. 4671:it. 4497:up. 3276:or 2971:. 2667:AfD 2517:! 2447:! 2377:! 2307:! 1918:. 1818:was 1627:"A 1530:MOS 1497:AfD 836:in 825:!) 765:). 759:bot 566:vs 338:. – 170:1. 147:? 5356:) 5341:) 5318:| 5298:) 5278:| 5238:) 5224:) 5210:) 5196:) 5181:) 5159:) 5140:) 5118:) 5086:| 5062:) 5039:| 5030:. 5020:) 4977:| 4953:) 4939:) 4909:| 4893:) 4855:) 4833:) 4810:) 4791:) 4776:) 4755:) 4741:) 4726:) 4707:) 4652:) 4631:) 4588:) 4566:) 4528:) 4508:) 4441:) 4414:do 4386:| 4367:) 4347:) 4328:) 4294:) 4255:) 4240:) 4222:) 4203:) 4185:) 4161:) 4118:) 4064:GA 4044:) 4012:) 3998:) 3984:) 3947:| 3913:) 3861:♬ 3840:. 3810:♬ 3788:) 3759:) 3730:) 3699:) 3674:}} 3668:{{ 3659:) 3634:) 3610:) 3596:}} 3590:{{ 3576:, 3564:. 3433:) 3408:) 3387:) 3379:. 3360:) 3341:) 3321:) 3292:) 3284:. 3272:, 3245:) 3213:| 3186:) 3170:, 3155:| 3138:) 3058:) 3041:) 3020:) 2997:) 2989:. 2979:) 2934:| 2910:) 2882:| 2865:) 2796:) 2772:) 2740:) 2706:) 2683:) 2659:) 2644:) 2619:| 2595:) 2558:) 2243:) 2212:) 2192:) 2178:) 2153:) 2118:) 2090:| 2027:) 1990:) 1982:. 1926:) 1896:? 1865:) 1844:) 1828:) 1809:) 1783:) 1757:) 1740:) 1718:) 1677:) 1647:) 1608:) 1588:) 1559:) 1507:) 1499:. 1488:) 1463:) 1413:) 1387:) 1266:) 1179:IS 1149:) 976:) 955:) 937:) 906:) 898:. 885:) 861:) 784:| 735:| 659:) 651:. 634:) 619:) 530:) 522:-- 499:, 482:) 424:) 406:) 323:) 315:. 290:) 272:) 254:) 237:) 233:• 155:) 111:, 64:← 5352:( 5337:( 5322:) 5320:c 5316:t 5314:( 5294:( 5282:) 5280:c 5276:t 5274:( 5234:( 5220:( 5206:( 5192:( 5177:( 5155:( 5136:( 5114:( 5090:) 5088:c 5084:t 5082:( 5058:( 5043:) 5041:c 5037:t 5035:( 5016:( 4981:) 4979:c 4975:t 4973:( 4949:( 4935:( 4913:) 4911:c 4907:t 4905:( 4889:( 4851:( 4829:( 4806:( 4787:( 4772:( 4751:( 4737:( 4722:( 4703:( 4648:( 4627:( 4584:( 4562:( 4524:( 4504:( 4437:( 4390:) 4388:c 4384:t 4382:( 4363:( 4343:( 4324:( 4290:( 4251:( 4236:( 4218:( 4199:( 4181:( 4157:( 4142:) 4138:( 4114:( 4040:( 4031:) 4027:( 4008:( 3994:( 3980:( 3951:) 3949:c 3945:t 3943:( 3909:( 3889:. 3877:— 3852:· 3847:( 3828:— 3784:( 3755:( 3726:( 3695:( 3655:( 3651:. 3630:( 3606:( 3552:— 3538:. 3526:— 3512:. 3500:— 3488:. 3476:— 3429:( 3404:( 3383:( 3356:( 3337:( 3317:( 3288:( 3241:( 3217:) 3215:c 3211:t 3209:( 3182:( 3159:) 3157:c 3153:t 3151:( 3134:( 3054:( 3037:( 3016:( 2993:( 2975:( 2938:) 2936:c 2932:t 2930:( 2906:( 2886:) 2884:c 2880:t 2878:( 2861:( 2792:( 2768:( 2736:( 2702:( 2679:( 2655:( 2640:( 2623:) 2621:c 2617:t 2615:( 2591:( 2554:( 2239:( 2208:( 2188:( 2174:( 2149:( 2114:( 2094:) 2092:c 2088:t 2086:( 2023:( 2019:3 1986:( 1954:) 1950:( 1922:( 1861:( 1840:( 1824:( 1805:( 1787:. 1779:( 1753:( 1736:( 1714:( 1673:( 1643:( 1604:( 1584:( 1555:( 1503:( 1484:( 1459:( 1451:( 1443:( 1409:( 1383:( 1262:( 1243:§ 1215:ξ 1145:( 1085:. 1046:. 972:( 951:( 933:( 902:( 881:( 857:( 840:? 788:) 786:c 782:t 780:( 739:) 737:c 733:t 731:( 699:. 678:( 655:( 638:. 630:( 615:( 534:. 526:( 486:. 478:( 428:. 420:( 402:( 319:( 286:( 268:( 250:( 229:( 194:) 151:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.