rationalskepticism.org

LucidFlight wrote:

Thommo wrote:

jamest wrote:The fact that I treat you as an individual is a reflection of my beliefs.

And you called SAM insincere. Everyone treats everyone as individuals. This isn't a fucking achievement!

I dunno, Thommo. That takes quite a bit of philosophical reasoning to think that there is some other individual beyond the observed orchestration of words on a screen in a non-existent physical world. How do we know you're not just some fancily-programmed AI, akin to a Nazi NPC or some such in Call of Duty?

Well, that's as maybe. I guess you interpreted my post as being thrust in the metaphysical, rather than empirical. But in fact, you can see that I inherited any metaphysical assumption about what is meant by "fact that I treat you as an individual" from the antecedent post, to which I was replying. Of.

So, once again, I welcome your clarification, and can agree that it might be that I am discussing the fact of treating others as individuals, or it might be that I am discussing the illusion of the fact of treating others as individuals. In either instance however, there is parity with with whether James was talking about the fact of treating others as individuals, or the illusion of the fact of treating others as individuals.

But as you can see, I am replying to you with a different message than I have ever replied to anyone before, meaning either I am treating you as an individual, or (the illusory) I am treating (the illusory) you as the illusion of being an individual.

QED!