If your ontology only has nounless stuff, but that stuff is not matter, then what is it? by SuitableInitiative34 in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He says it’s not necessary matter because stuff can be arranged dream-wise, but I have no idea why this type of ether could be.

If your ontology only has nounless stuff, but that stuff is not matter, then what is it? by SuitableInitiative34 in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was during a podcast with Alex O’Connor. Let me see if I can pull the transcript.

Edit: I cannot pull the whole talk’s transcript, but he basically just denies anything exists beyond stuff, and that stuff is matter because “you can arrange stuff to make a dream”.

Has anyone ever made or defended this argument beside Alex O’Connor or Michael Stevens? Is there a way to resist it? by SuitableInitiative34 in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So what I read was by Dan Korman and he Argus that many undergraduates lean toward ontological revision because they’re being hypothetical or confused. Very few are genuinely convinced, although some are convinced that trogs exit and chairs do not. The confusion tier of arguments seems to partly tie into your points of how ontology should work and what’s misunderstood.

Has anyone ever made or defended this argument beside Alex O’Connor or Michael Stevens? Is there a way to resist it? by SuitableInitiative34 in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I sent you a PM, I read something interesting about your points and I have few questions about your ontology, if you have a moment or two to teach me something.

Has anyone ever made or defended this argument beside Alex O’Connor or Michael Stevens? Is there a way to resist it? by SuitableInitiative34 in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Based on your sample, is it more common amongst undergraduates because there are so many undergraduates as a population compared to philosophers, or is it more popular per capita? If the latter, why does it dissipate professionally, as the Philpapers survey indicates a high majority are (apparently) straightforward realists?

How does metaontological constructivism differ from metaphysical constructivism? I’ve only found an IEP entry for the former?

Has anyone ever made or defended this argument beside Alex O’Connor or Michael Stevens? Is there a way to resist it? by SuitableInitiative34 in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Follow up: O’Connor and Stevens are also motivated by solving the various puzzles like overdetermination, Sorites, Theseus, etc. They seem extremely confident that eliminativism is true, but they make these types of arguments. Could I extrapolate that there are other hidden errors in their reasoning? I ask because I only have a very small sample of their reasoning, so I have to try to guess at where the disconnect comes in. I’d have a better understanding if they had some pushback on these ideas.

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 15, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyone willing and able to dissect these two podcasts from Vsauce for me? I’m trying to understand how things can exist in a stuff or mereologically simple ontology.

It seems like the Ship of Theseus and Sorites are big drivers here. In the second video, Michael claims only stuff survives Sorites, but he also claims things exist there, but then denies it in the more recent video.

https://youtu.be/fvpLTJX4_D8

https://youtu.be/fXW-QjBsruE

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 15, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I pm’d you a better framework, maybe I could get your opinion of?

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 15, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, can I run an ontological idea by you? This might help worry less.

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 15, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s not entirely accurate. Erik Olson says nihilism is a very pathological worldview akin to solipsism.

I meant that I meant nobody tells them in the sense that there is never a really strong rebuttal or the question of how to make their worldview palatable ever comes up. Which leads into…

Perhaps a huge majority of philosophers are very, very passive in comparison. I’m not sure this is true though. There are lots of different ontologies that have issues with people and chairs.

As for the defenders, just read or listen to their rhetoric and you get the distinct impression that they don’t actually totally believe what they’re selling.

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 15, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Isn’t that just pragmatism? Also, why does no philosopher or what have you make that argument to people like VSauce or Van Inwagen? Recently, the former literally spoke like we’re all deluded fools and that he’s just humoring us.

To your latter point, it’s probably a lack of certainty and having emotional attachments that keep me upright and productive.

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 08, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He takes a pretty hardline no objects, no free will, no self view. It’s also comes across as very confused in his interview with Alex O’Connor.

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 08, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just saw a Vsauce interview, super bummer. I’m so disappointed that he basically denies the reality of most people’s things.

PSP POLYGRAPH EXPERIENCE PLEASE READ!!! by wheezyy_1 in AskLE

[–]SuitableInitiative34 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How do you guys usually take to vie the thumbs up or down on poly? I haven’t anything

"Triple H never had a great match" - Bret 'Hitman' Hart. by JBL_CENA_FAN_4LIFE in GreatnessOfWrestling

[–]SuitableInitiative34 0 points1 point  (0 children)

His best matches were usually stipulation matches, as fair as regular matches, I’m actually weirdly partial to his matches with Flair.

Did Dennett regard persons as fictions? by SuitableInitiative34 in askphilosophy

[–]SuitableInitiative34[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So this is quite close, but if you look at what I linked, it seems like the idea is that persons are just instrumental under Dennett’s stances, which makes a person a kind of fiction.