tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post116279879303263039..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Homunculi and Objective PurposeRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1162897205929485502006-11-07T06:00:00.000-05:002006-11-07T06:00:00.000-05:00*shrug*, it seems like the most charitable interpr...*shrug*, it seems like the most charitable interpretation, don't you think? It's hard to make sense of what else he might be suggesting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1162887661708143482006-11-07T03:21:00.000-05:002006-11-07T03:21:00.000-05:00Richard,Why do you think that Koons is relying on ...Richard,<BR/><BR/>Why do you think that Koons is relying on the assumption about normativity?Clayton Littlejohnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05596200828134402805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1162875049890666492006-11-06T23:50:00.000-05:002006-11-06T23:50:00.000-05:00a statement like "human beings lack minds" seems n...a statement like "human beings lack minds" seems nonsenical.<BR/><BR/>a mind is "the thing that we have" rather like a "richard chappell" is the thing that you are.Geniushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11624496692217466430noreply@blogger.com