Discussion:

Check it out:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=0WWL4QWI

A puzzle

Here is an argument:

1) If naturalism, then necessarily not substance dualism. [N → □¬D]
2) possibly substance dualism. [◊D]
3) therefore, not naturalism. [¬N]

Can you spot the flaw? Answer tomorrow.

Best Possible World?

It's a common view nowadays that there is no best possible world - because for any world in which some "good unit" exists (such as a human), there could always be one more unit of that type.

It seems to follow from this that if God exists, his criteria for creating a world is not a moral one. Perhaps God's criteria is aesthetic - but, perhaps an aesthetic criteria reduces to a moral one, in that the reason for creating an aesthetic world is so that moral agents which exist in this world can appreciate it, and creating a world in which moral agents can appreciate the beauty of creation is a moral good.

What are your thoughts on what God's criteria for choosing a world to actualize might be?

This Week

I have a few things I'm reading this week:

- substance dualism
- are some things neither right nor wrong?
- is anything right or wrong, objectively?
- God as "the Good"
- whether a natural language is required for thinking

I will post thoughts throughout the week, as I read.

Hello, World!

Most of the people reading this will know me as "Nocterro" on Urban Philosophy (http://urbanphilosophy.net). My longer writings will still be posted there - this is for shorter things, ideas I have while I read philosophy, etc.