[MD] "proper use of terms"

[david buchanan]

Steve said to Ian:
I don't know what you could be asking for here (..) if you are talking about the issue rather than the meta-issue. On the issue itself for the most part I have just been trying to defend myself against dmb's attacks. In that regard "my point" is that I am not a "hack" or "immune to logic" or "wildly incoherent" or "illogical" or a so-called "thinker" or simultaneously asserting mutually exclusive positions, etc.


dmb says:
Exactly. Your "point" is almost always to protect your ego. That's why we go around in circles. That's why your responses are so rarely about the substance of the matter. You're way too busy trying to protect yourself so that there is no room left for any real interest in the MOQ's formulation. Ironically, if you could just manage to stick to the point and otherwise stop looking for bogus ways to weasel out of the criticism you wouldn't look like so much of an incoherent hack. Your ego-centric concerns keep getting you stuck in these endless loops. Any genuine exchange takes honesty and humility and maturity because one has to be open to the possibility that the other guy is right.

But, apparently, you just can't do that. Even after the point has been made at least four times (twice by Ian and twice by me), you still can't bring yourself to face it. You're avoiding a logical point even while you protest against the charge that you're being illogical. The only legitimate way to respond to a criticism like that, obviously, is to provide an answer that isn't illogical. For at least the fifth time, then, how can the compatibilist say that free will and determinism are compatible without qualifying their determinism as the kind that admits some freedom? Put another way, if determinism is understood as a total lack of freedom, how could it be compatible with freedom?

That one question is a criticism that says you're are being illogical and/or misusing the terms. Taking that seriously and answering it sincerely would go a very long way toward making you look like a competent person. Addressing the actual concern would not only make things less frustrating for me (and for anyone else who is trying follow your line of reasoning), it would also be good for your ego. If you stop with the face-saving bullshit and get serious I'll have much, much less to criticize in the first place.

But I'm not holding my breath.