[Bups-dis] Action and conceivability

[lj lj]

Greetings,

Edward-

What do you mean by "I can conceive of this in functional terms"? Are 
concepts functional? Yes, they can be but are their contents? I'm not sure 
what that would even mean.

I think that there are two broad issues here and I think that the one that 
is going to be the most problematic is the issue of whether it makes sense 
to talk about the inconceivable.
And therein lays the problem with your question: conceivable for whom? Just 
the agent or anyone whom happens to be observing or just anyone in theory?

There's lots that I could say on this topic but I wonder if it might be 
meaningless. And by this I'm not sure if it even makes sense to talk about 
the inconceivable. I mean, does our supposedly detached position really 
immunise us from the charge that simply TALKING about the inconceivable is 
meaningless? Isn't this a conceptual analysis that we are attempting to do? 
And, if so, what would it even MEAN to say that some (voluntary) actions 
might be inconceivable? That they are actions or not is irrelevant: the 
issue here is that if they are genuinely inconceivable then they are not 
conceivable by an agent that is the object of the analysis nor are they 
conceivable by us who are providing the analysis.

Regards,

Luis.

_________________________________________________________________
Need a brain boost? Recharge with a stimulating game. Play now!  
http://club.live.com/home.aspx?icid=club_hotmailtextlink1