@BanksFace21 @LeoGreninjaKid @thewiseburner @EmilySm28923962@ABC How? It concerns meaning, not phonetic similarities. If anything, like me, you are being padentic rather than “playing semantics.”
@DonJuan603@Mr_JohnQNobody2@barstoolsports Well, let's hope Searle was right about computers being syntactic manipulators, necessarily devoid of an understanding of semantics, and thus lacking volition.
@CheriexBeau@Claretseru @s0fiaruiz “You see, Your Honor, per the ninth clause in the second page of our written agreement, I was perfectly within my rights to shove this [exhibit A] up his bunghole.”
@EdSaidThis1 @Samringwald @freethinkingkin @BBCWorld @Jorgensen4POTUS What? My point is, an obligation to promote the well-being of others is real either in itself or by being deemed as such by society at large. It’s not about feelings, but rather about the norms that justify your actions, including voting. The point of contention is over...
@EdSaidThis1 @Samringwald @freethinkingkin @BBCWorld @Jorgensen4POTUS Lol, what? How can you reduce one to the other. A Normative standard that is justified by virtue of its cogency to others isn’t emotional. You seem to grasp neither phrase.
@EdSaidThis1 @Samringwald @freethinkingkin @BBCWorld @Jorgensen4POTUS It isn’t “emotional” to appeal to the indirect effect that such voting would have on the well-being of persons. If you have a positive moral obligation toward others, and if Biden’s policies best coincide with its fulfillment, then you’d be morally obliged to vote for him.