Difference between revisions of "NameTheTrait"
(→History) |
(→History) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Whether this formalization represents a new argument in terms of structure that replaces an invalid original argument or represents only a formalization of the original argument that corrects for informal semantic issues is moot. Arguments for the former appeal to early comments and original usage/presentation (which is discussed briefly in the old article), while arguments for the latter appeal to stated authorial intent. Given that the argument is valid now, its relationship to the previous argument isn't particularly relevant to its current force or persuasive ability. | Whether this formalization represents a new argument in terms of structure that replaces an invalid original argument or represents only a formalization of the original argument that corrects for informal semantic issues is moot. Arguments for the former appeal to early comments and original usage/presentation (which is discussed briefly in the old article), while arguments for the latter appeal to stated authorial intent. Given that the argument is valid now, its relationship to the previous argument isn't particularly relevant to its current force or persuasive ability. | ||
| − | The formalization created here was created by | + | The formalization created here was created by the original author Isaac Brown (A.K.A. Ask Yourself) in consultation with Dr. Avi, _JHC, and [unknown]. |
While some practical limitations (in terms of audience) may still apply, this argument could serve as a compelling one within its niche (which has been said to be non-theistic subjectivists who want to be generalists) and deserves some discussion. | While some practical limitations (in terms of audience) may still apply, this argument could serve as a compelling one within its niche (which has been said to be non-theistic subjectivists who want to be generalists) and deserves some discussion. | ||
Revision as of 22:51, 9 January 2019
History
The previous incarnation of Name The Trait had several issues (as discussed in that article) which led to us recommending strongly against its usage. The new formalization of Name The Trait (discussed here) has largely corrected for these and is formally valid.
Whether this formalization represents a new argument in terms of structure that replaces an invalid original argument or represents only a formalization of the original argument that corrects for informal semantic issues is moot. Arguments for the former appeal to early comments and original usage/presentation (which is discussed briefly in the old article), while arguments for the latter appeal to stated authorial intent. Given that the argument is valid now, its relationship to the previous argument isn't particularly relevant to its current force or persuasive ability.
The formalization created here was created by the original author Isaac Brown (A.K.A. Ask Yourself) in consultation with Dr. Avi, _JHC, and [unknown].
While some practical limitations (in terms of audience) may still apply, this argument could serve as a compelling one within its niche (which has been said to be non-theistic subjectivists who want to be generalists) and deserves some discussion.
This article will begin by presented the argument, explaining how it is formally valid, and conclude by discussing potential pros and cons to its usage. This page will also keep track of future iterations of or improvements to the argument.
