I found this post, and the rest of the series thus far, quite interesting. I still feel very confused about this whole topic, but I think thatās more to do with the topic and/āor my intuitions and lack of background, and less to do with your arguments or writing.
At the moment, it looks like the post has 12 votes but only 8 karma, suggesting thereāve been some downvotes. But there arenāt any comments highlighting key flaws or counterarguments (at least, I donāt think MichaelStJulesā comments do that). Iād personally be quite interested to hear about whether people are seeing important flaws in the arguments madeāas opposed to just disliking discussion of anti-realism or something like thatāand, if so, what those flaws might be.
I donāt find the arguments fully convincing myself, but I donāt know if I can articulate why (or if thereās a good reason at all), and I donāt know if I put much weight on my failure to feel convinced.
Thanks! Yeah, Iām curious about the same questions regarding the strong downvotes. Since I wrote āit works well as a standalone piece,ā I guess I couldnāt really complain if people felt that the post was unconvincing on its own. I think the point Iām making in the āBegging the questionā subsection only works if one doesnāt think of anti-realism as nihilism/āanything goes. I only argued for that in previous posts.
(If the downvotes were because readers are tired of the topic or thought that the discussion of Huemerās argument was really dry, the good news is that I have only 1 post left for the time being, and itās going to be a dialogue, so perhaps more engaging than this one.)
I found this post, and the rest of the series thus far, quite interesting. I still feel very confused about this whole topic, but I think thatās more to do with the topic and/āor my intuitions and lack of background, and less to do with your arguments or writing.
At the moment, it looks like the post has 12 votes but only 8 karma, suggesting thereāve been some downvotes. But there arenāt any comments highlighting key flaws or counterarguments (at least, I donāt think MichaelStJulesā comments do that). Iād personally be quite interested to hear about whether people are seeing important flaws in the arguments madeāas opposed to just disliking discussion of anti-realism or something like thatāand, if so, what those flaws might be.
I donāt find the arguments fully convincing myself, but I donāt know if I can articulate why (or if thereās a good reason at all), and I donāt know if I put much weight on my failure to feel convinced.
Thanks! Yeah, Iām curious about the same questions regarding the strong downvotes. Since I wrote āit works well as a standalone piece,ā I guess I couldnāt really complain if people felt that the post was unconvincing on its own. I think the point Iām making in the āBegging the questionā subsection only works if one doesnāt think of anti-realism as nihilism/āanything goes. I only argued for that in previous posts.
(If the downvotes were because readers are tired of the topic or thought that the discussion of Huemerās argument was really dry, the good news is that I have only 1 post left for the time being, and itās going to be a dialogue, so perhaps more engaging than this one.)