humanities.philosophy.objectivism

On Apr 1, 11:23 pm, Gordon Sollars wrote:

> A dog can be wrong.

Could he know it?

What does this mean, anyway? Does it mean some dog thinks
3 + 4 is 8, or does it mean that he does something which proves
not to be so good for him, like the ant that almost erred by
coming near your foot?

I assume the latter, but I don't see how this can accurately
be called "wrong" without awareness of the purpose of the
action. Are you saying the dog has THAT, or only that he
does differently than we would do if faced with his options?

We've mentioned a dog hearing a fake bark. How can his
perception be "wrong" if he hasn't abstractly conceptualized
a belief that there's a dog there? It's like you wanna say,
"Well, if we asked him, he'd say there's a dog there." I don't
see how "acting as if there's a dog there" can qualify as
"wrong" in itself.


jk