The law of identity is a fundamental law of logic, established to prevent deceptive use of terms. such as equivocation. We are discussing the use of t...
I interpret then, that you are saying that whether a state is equilibrated or not is completely dependent on one's perspective, one's frame of referen...
I already went through this. If two symbols refer to the same thing, they are equal. But it is a fallacy of affirming the consequent to say that if tw...
Did you read my quote from Wikipedia? Since Wikipedia agrees with me. it seems highly unlikely that most folk would disagree with me. Notice how "same...
Really, you think that two equal people, because they are equal, are the same person. I think you are very wrong to think that most people would disag...
it's quite obvious, that in no way is 2+2 the same as 4. That's the point. It's very clear that 2+2 is equal to 4, meaning that the two have the same ...
What he was actually refuting was Pythagorean idealism (Platonic idealism in modern terms). What he showed was that if ideas preexist human minds, the...
Fishfry claimed to have given me a proof of this, in the other thread, and continues to refer to this proof. Do you accept this definition, that to be...
Yeah, Trump seems to like to manufacture these imaginary crisis situations at election time. I seem to remember something about a caravan of immigrant...
After months of arguing this point, fishfry still seems to think that the equals sign means the same. Next, fishfry will offer me a proof of this. As ...
This is what Aristotle claims to refute with the "cosmological argument", the idea of "emergent actuality". This is why he needed to posit the "prime ...
The equal sign means that the two sides are equal, just as "equal" indicates. Here's what Wikipedia says: "The equals sign or equality sign, =, is a m...
This says to me, that "matter" might appear as a particle, or it might appear as a wave, depending on one's perspective. But do you see the need to de...
Read specifically Bk.9, Ch.8, where he explains how actuality is prior to potency, and how anything eternal must be actual, not potential. This exclud...
Aristotle discussed the concept of prime matter, because it was a common speculation in his time. He ended up proving that it is impossible that such ...
We're just going around in the same circle. By what principle do you say that this string of symbols "2+2" refers to one object? How would you disting...
No I'm not making such an identity. But I'm saying that if you assert that "2+2" is the same object as "4" you are claiming such an identity. The proc...
A number such as what is indicated by the numeral "4", is an abstract quantity. In the case of "2+2" , there are two distinct abstract quantities sign...
There is no question that 2+2=4. Not even a fool would deny that. The question is whether "2+2" represents the same object as "4". I think it's true t...
You've forgotten about summation. It might be the case that "4" represents 4-ness, but "2+2" represents a particular instance of the general rule of s...
The fact that different people use the same word in different ways does not necessitate the conclusion that there is not a correct way to use it. It c...
That's not true, we went through this in the other thread. The application of the rules of mathematics always has a different purpose from the applica...
This is exactly my point, such axioms are based in ontological principles, they are not "pure mathematics. You can insist that there is no ontology to...
That's a generalization, so it's not relevant unless you propose Platonic realism which allows for the non-temporal existence of universals. We're sti...
It's questionable whether using a word in an unusual way produces a sound argument. For the sake of a logical argument, one can define a word in any w...
Yes, utility includes that, because there's always a reason why one explores one subject rather than another. I study for the very same reason, to fin...
Any claim, which anyone makes, says something about one's mind, so they can all be said to be psychological claims. So that's really irrelevant. But t...
There's no mismatch in my discourse, you simply refuse to try and understand what I'm saying. I believe that two plus two equals four. I do not believ...
So as I said, physical existence is a description, not any particular thing or type of thing. Physicists, and other scientists make models to represen...
I don't know of any particular thing or type of thing called "physical existence". And, for the purpose of referring to a thing, is clearly not how th...
You clearly do not understand, if you think that I accept the Fourier transform. I accept it as an example of an unresolved problem. And when that unr...
You don't seem to understand. "Physical existence" is a description. Do you recognize the difference between pointing to a thing also giving it a name...
No, I'm not Kantian, though Kant's perspective is not so different, and consistent with mine. I'm simply describing reality. And since Kant's perspect...
But "physical existence" very clearly is a product of the imagination. What it means to be "physical", and what it means to "exist" are products of th...
I see you haven't addressed my examples, only contradicted yourself, saying metaphysicians are better trained to do metaphysics than physicists, yet p...
Simply try to imagine the universe without a temporal perspective. The way things are, what we call "physical existence", is completely dependent on o...
This is the faulty assumption which idealism demonstrates as false. There is no such thing as physical existence without a perspective. So the perspec...
At the core of of theoretical physics are the concepts of time and space. We have no empirical access to time, we cannot sense it in any way. Nor do w...
But the issue being discussed was whether science could fully understand consciousness. The cultural determinations you refer to, which form the basis...
No it isn't all we have, that's the fallacy of scientism, and the point where I entered this discussion in the first place. When the subject of study ...
OK, so the evidence as I see it, indicates that rocks are deterministic, and human beings are not. It appears to me that mosquitoes are not determinis...
OK, then let's call it metaphysics, if you're ok with that. Now, are you willing to recognize that a metaphysician, trained in the principles of metap...
Sure, he was addressing existing problems. But he came up with a new principle, which implies necessarily that his thinking went outside the box, repr...
I don't know, I was not the one arguing that a "full understanding "is possible. But I think I've demonstrated through the use of examples, that the c...
Comments