optimise both positive and negative liberty — jastopher

Sounds a bit like word salad to me. At best weasel words.
If my teacher tells me to stand on my head with a fish in my bum, and I refuse, then I will be responding negatively to their suggestion; if I accept the instruction that would be positive.

Education is to push societal norms, by examination, otherwise there is no growth or change. Education is to preserve and extend knowledge. To allow each student to gather knowledge and skills to the best of their ability, and by pushing their potential to new lengths. It is to make students aware of 'norms' and to teach them critical skills to examine those norms so that they can thrive is an ever changing world, socially, economically, and artistically.

Languages, like organic species, go extinct and die; — StreetlightX

But languages are not non-organic. At the level of neurology they have to same use it or loose it evolution. Memetics applies to neural structures, though it appears as ideals.

You might want to look at Gerald Edleman on the Neural Evolution.

Languages do not speciate. If you accept that species are defined by their mutual lack or reproductivity. There seem to be no human languages which cannot borrow words and grammar from another.

[

No, but my hope is that a teacher would at least have thought about the question and would thus have at least one answer. — jastopher

Such a question cannot be answered in a short interview. Given that teacher training is little more than a box ticking exercise I imagine you'd be happy with a rehearsed stock answer.
Do you really think that ANY candidate had no answer, or have you not taken the trouble is assess the power of your position, in intimidating candidates with such a question, and failed to notice several potentially excellent teachers along the way ?

As a head-teacher, — jastopher

You ought to know. Let's hear it!

Do tell us why. — Agustino

You would have to understand the philosophical debate of the time.
There was massive skepticism after the Lisbon earthquake of 1755, to which Leibniz hilarious response, so devastatingly parodied in Candide, was all for the best in the best of all possible worlds. Hume is specifically attacking this bit of silliness.
There is no purpose to the pain of gout, and many other conditions. For such elementary mistakes to be made God is nothing more than a useless tinkerer.

Nope. That makes utterly no sense. The possibility of gout is necessitated by our biological structure, and our biological structure — Agustino

So why don't you get it?

He is observing that people in general do not find such Leibnizian "All's for the best in this best of all possible worlds" arguments helpful. — andrewk

FFS!! Hume is deliberately saying how stupid that argument is. The world could quite easily exist without the pain of gout - that's the bloody point!!

True, however, the possibility of such useless pain as that of gout is required in order for other goods in the world to be possible (such as useful pain). You cannot have useful pain without also having the possibility for useless pain. — Agustino

asinine!

This is ridiculous.. — Agustino

Yes I know you are ridiculous. What of it.?

Thus, you've gained something through pain, which, by your own logic, you would not have gained otherwise. — Noble Dust

I think understand the argument but not fully, without gout pain or similar. But I'd not go through that pain just to understand Hume's argument.
The pain of gout certainly has nothing to do with Augusto's asinine "naturalistic/atheistic" argument.

I thought your position was equality in treatment in men and women. Now you argue for different level of treatment? I am not sure where you stand. — Samuel Lacrampe

I stand on a platform which insists that morality is subjective. My personal position is not relevant. I've only to demonstrate that there are DIFFERENT positions which are based on preferences that are cultural, social and personal.

Women are incapable of giving birth without men. :cool: — Samuel Lacrampe

In theory we could all be born of stem cells. women would still be needed to gestate the foetus.

↪charleton I’m sorry you had to experience such pain. Can you possibly elaborate on what it means to say “pain beyond reason”? What can that mean? Would it make sense in a similar fashion to say you have experienced joy beyond reason? Thanks. — matt

Sounds like your gout helped you understand Hume's argument. Doesn't sound meaningless. — Noble Dust

What is the function of pain? I suppose the argument that animals that feel no pain tend to die, and so in evolutionary terms pain is useful.
However - what lesson am I to take from gout? Gout tends to strike after the age of maturity. It fist happened to me whilst my son was being born. I had more gas & air than his mother!!
Gout is hereditary. There is no use to it and the pain of it is unreasonable since there is no evolutionary benefit to such extreme pain. The pain is unavoidable. It is only through science that we learn how diet and drugs can help the onset of instances of gout.
Pain beyond reason! If you cut your finger and it hurts, it teaches you to not cut your finger next time.
Is there no joy beyond reason?

The pain of gout is due to a slight imbalance in the chemical pathways that change uric acid (a by-product of protein digestion)to urea which is urinated through the kidneys. Crystals of uric acid build up in the lower joints, especially the big toes, but also knees and even hips.
Imagine, if you will, having sand injected directly inside the joint to rub against the cartilage when the slightest movement of the joint is made. Massive inflammation of pain is the result, as if your toe had been ripped off and an electric sander pressed against the raw bloody end.
As well as being debilitating, people think it is some sort of joke disease from the 18thC. Jibes about too much wine and too many cigars follow as you hobble about with a stick or crutch.

I refuse to answer it in this case since you harbour some prejudices which ought to be investigated. — Agustino

It's okay if you are celibate, or gay or whatever. This is the 21st C. You ought to be less sensitive and more honest - it might do you some good.

Another interesting and relevant fact is that collisions between CO2 molecules and other molecules (such as oxygen and nitrogen) produce what is called pressure broadening of the CO2 spectral lines. — Pierre-Normand

Interesting but speculative.

The CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is high enough that, at sea level pressure and dry conditions, almost all of the upwelling infrared radiation has already been scattered by CO2 molecules on the first ten meters on their way up — Pierre-Normand

No water vapour is the most potent greenhouse chemical and well as methane.

So what happens if you commit serious immoralities and then commit suicide? Don't you escape punishment according to the atheist view? — Agustino

No more or less than a religious person. Break the law and risk getting caught. Behave badly and risk the censure of the public.
Suicide is painless, and an answer to some problems. Why mention it?

..

Topic Title: Would there be a need for atheism if there was no fear of responsibility & accountability? — Agustino

Atheism does not absolve anyone from responsibility or accountability .
Atheists are good without the promise of an afterlife, or the threat of eternal punishment.

Not at all. People who already held gold turned it in to receive back from the government less gold, but in the form of a coin that could be used to buy things. So, while MMT is correct that all currency is based on a political organization that legalizes the use of a currency for the payment of debts, goods and services, it is wrong when it claims money originated by governments making it up out of thin air. — LD Saunders

You can't eat gold. Gold is as arbitrary as any medium of exchange. You make the usual mistake of thinking that money is the same as wealth, when it is far from it.
The myth you carry around has always served the rich and greedy. The promise that gold has a magical value has simply been transferred to a paper promise.

(And if the claim that chromosome reconfiguration is not "true speciation" somehow, remind them that they are cheating, since the layman's idea of "a species" has nothing to do with genotypes; it is about morphology). — Mariner

There is a body of knowledge which is relevant here. Groups of the same species that are separated geographically they can mate with groups near to them, but a sort of chain is formed in which the groups at the most extreme ends of the chain can no longer mate. There is a name for this, sadly I cannot recall what that is.

:smirk: Mmmm, I am enchanted that you have such interest in my sexual history. But what does your question have to do with what we were discussing? — Agustino

I'll take that as a big NO. Please refrain from talking on subjects you know nothing about.

Yes, it can be argued, for example, that the pain and possibility of gout were necessary in order for us to exist in the first place as a result of evolution (on a purely naturalistic/atheistic view) — Agustino

That gets the silly post of the week award. I'm not talking about s stubbed toe or a paper cut. Gout is is pain beyond reason. That's why I made the comment.

I've suffered from gout and suggest that no one can comment on his argument and fully understand it until they have also experienced that pain.

There is no argument which can point to the pain of gout being of any purpose or use. But I think that given a world wide point of view there are many more examples of useless and pointless suffering.

↪charleton Not from what I've seen. — Agustino

have you ever had sex?

Suffice to say that I have no clue what you're on about. — Agustino

I am suggesting that oral sex is seen as a step up from just screwing. It is more intimate and interesting than all that excessive humping.

The promise of life after death is religion's lure. Freedom from religious dogmas originates from acceptance that there is no life after death. — CuddlyHedgehog

I am given to understand that religion also provides a context for social interaction. though the same can be achieved with pop music and football team supporting.
I was talking to an ex-patriot Welshman the other day who was talking about how the local Capels had been taken over for property development and turned into houses.
In his 'village', there is now one Church (C of E) still opening every Sunday to a small audience and 19 ex-Capels - all now converted into housing. Villages are small, so to have 20 religious buildings in a village meant that every Sunday only the sick or infirm stayed home.
The Capel was a place for gossip and socialisation.
It would seem that TV and other entertainments have taken the place of that particular "religious" function.

I hate to break it to you, but there are plenty of religious denominations that don't believe in life after death. — Joshs

"Plenty"??? Name three!

Or only oral sex, etc. — Agustino

ONLY???
Some ONLY screw!!

P is "Jones will get the job and has 10 coins in his pocket" and Q is "the person who gets the job has 10 coins in his pocket". — Michael

Neither of those examples deserves the words "justified" or "entails".
Maybe Gettier expressed the situation more clearly?
So unless there is a more convincing example I'll bow out.

What currently makes you feel confident and empowered to be your most authentic self? — GBaxter

I wake up in the morning is the answer to this question.

Life is a negotiation between what will you have to live your life as you wish, and the interests of those interests of society and those you have direct contact with.
Some people are more authentically appealing to the needs of society and others are more authentically self interested.
It is only arrogance of people like Nietzsche who think people ought to be more self interested.

Nietzsche was the man who poured scorn on the needs of disabled people, and had no interest in welfare of his fellow man wanted to justify is selfishness with fancy words whilst people all around him more honestly followed their true selves in helping others.

We are all authentic who reflect.

1. P is justified
2. P entails Q
3. Q is true
4. P is false — Michael

a person called Smith is applying for a job.
Another person, Jones, whom is known to have 10 coins in his pocket, is applying for the job as well,

and Smith (for a justified reason) believes Jones will get the job. This is the belief a.
The conclusion b is that the person who gets the job has 10 coins in his pocket.

What happens is that Smith himself gets the job, but also, although he didn't know this, had 10 coins in his pocket.

How does P entail Q in this example. Having 10 coins in your pocket is not relevant to employment opportunities and so that would mean that P does not entail Q.

Should we? — aporiap

Depends if you prefer crying or laughing.

So, if you want to know why CO2 is important — Pierre-Normand

Being patronising will not help your (ahem!) "argument" I knew Co2 was a greenhouse gas when you were in your nappies.

They are accurate enough. I am going to abide by unenlightened's request, though. So, if you want to know why CO2 is important, you can post this again in this thread. I'll then reply over-there. — Pierre-Normand

Historical data is gathered by completely different means.
The scandal of the hockey stick was due to this problem. Estimated as the probably Co2 concentrations of ancient atmospheres were gleaned through ice-core analysis, and put on the same graph as direct measurements with modern equipment of actual atmospheric air.
Date gained 150 years ago used completely different methods of estimation. Since Co2 fluctuates wildly depending on where on the earth you gather it, the tiny differnce you picked me up on it absurdly insignificant.

Francis Bacon home page — frank

Unless you are saying that EVERY Bacon shows this riskiness, please indicate which ones you are talking about.

I don't see the connection tbh. — BlueBanana

1) I have abelief that black cats are unlucky.
2) One walks across my path.
3) After that I break my leg.
4) I know justify my belief that black cats are unlucky because I broke my leg. Justifed and believed true. JTB

However the breaking of the leg and the cat are not connected, therefore JTB is false.

How is your example different?

JTB is not valid. — BlueBanana

Depends on the justification surely? If I continued to have bad luck after seeing black cat it could be confirmation bias. Eventually I'd have to ignore the sighting of a black cat that was not followed by bad luck.

↪charleton In Gettier's original example, a person called Smith is applying for a job. Another person, Jones, whom is known to have 10 coins in his pocket, is applying for the job as well, and Smith (for a justified reason) believes Jones will get the job. This is the belief a. The conclusion b is that the person who gets the job has 10 coins in his pocket. What happens is that Smith himself gets the job, but also, although he didn't know this, had 10 coins in his pocket. — BlueBanana

You mean belief 'a' is falsely confirmed by a co-incidence of fact.

Like a black cat walked across my path and I subsequently tripped over and broke my leg, falsely confirming the black cats are unlucky?
post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.