Metaphysician Undercover

I don't think "stand roughly there" refers to an area at all. It refers to a spot, "there", the spot where I want you to stand. But the speaker who sa...

I think I see what you're saying, but I believe the situation is more complex than you make it out to be. I agree that we measure in discrete units, n...

So what? I have some spare time. I find the book extremely interesting. And I like to be an active participant in discussing it. I think I see your po...

If I said "stand there", I would be referring to the particular spot that I want you to stand at, because that's the nature of standing, to be at a pa...

But this is clearly incorrect, and that's the problem. There are relevant factors, innate within the human mind, things we're born with, instinctual, ...

The "context" is our own measurement of them. We measure their existence, and say that they have "extension" but extension is just how they are repres...

Personally, I never gave it any thought, so this is all new to me. As far as I know, maybe that's what people thought. It's clearly a puzzle, if you w...

OK, let's assume that a "medium" is the environment that things exist in. Where do you get the idea that this environment does not consist of discrete...

But Wittgenstein lays out little problems, in almost every section, one after the other, and often suggests resolutions. And there is a problem at 72,...

Try this. "Stand roughly there" does not signify an area at all. It signifies a point, which has not been properly determined.

I assume that at 71, he's leading up to his discussion of definition at 72-73. What do you think he's saying with the analogy of "stand roughly there"...

Yes, it's an evolving concept. It came into existence and changed when necessary. Einstein realized the concept of special relativity by thinking diff...

Thanks for the encouragement Banno. I'll try to keep on track of the thread, I promise.

That's your opinion. Got any support for that opinion? Where does this idea of a continuous medium come from? Things themselves are the medium of sepa...

I definitely would not equate the two, because what I'm saying goes way beyond what you're saying. Nevertheless it's an extrapolation of the same prin...

Well of course, no one would expect that you could simply will anything to happen, you have to act on it to achieve success.

Space-time is part of the model in physics. What is modeled is the way things behave, the way events occur. There's nothing about the model which says...

As we get further into how Wittgenstein describes what it means to follow a rule, you'll see that this is exactly what follows from his position. To a...

That's because "space-time" is purely conceptual. If you "zoom in" on a concept defined as continuous you'll never see anything other than continuity,...

I think you can willfully forget through distraction. It would be very difficult to forget your name though because people keep reminding you. Maybe i...

There's a problem here though. It is one of the most fundamental aspects of our experience, that past events are substantially different from future e...

The problem is that it is invalid to cross predicates in this way. A is B is to predicate B of the subject A. A is C is to predicate C of the subject ...

How do you know that Trump has no megalomaniac visions? This type of person keeps one's visions a secret. That's how deception works, by hiding one's ...

I think the best way to get rid of unwanted beliefs is to forget them. Unlike The Mad Fool, I think that this is actually very possible. The best way ...

There's no error,.it's clear from what Wittgenstein says. A boundary may be created in use for a special purpose. But it is not necessary to create su...

Your claim that I was making an error was based in this: Once you remove this division, which you made rather than Wittgenstein, and recognize that ev...

Sorry, but I just can't see your point. you appear to have gotten totally confused. I said that I could see the likely possibility of a paradox ("prob...

Use for a particular purpose creates a boundary. If it's used for something other than a particular purpose, then I assume there would be no boundary ...

It's not necessary.

Now your catching on.

What we refer to as "time", and what is measured as time, is the process by which what is in the future becomes what is in the past. I don't think we ...

No, he does not refer to "conventional use" nor does he distinguish an instance of special use from an ordinary instance of use. He says at 68 that th...

Why does this contradict what a universe should be? Do you think that a universe ought to be given a special status? Why, and what would be that speci...

What if someone happened to believe that Wittgenstein is the one making a mistake? Such a person might believe that boundaries are inherent within, an...

That's not time which is being cyclical, it's the actions of people which is cyclical in that description. That some people are repetitive in their ac...

You're right, "game" has a context within Wittgenstein's use here. Therefore it is being used for a special purpose, and there is likely a boundary im...

I don't see where the cyclical aspect comes from. Yes, cyclical perhaps, but I don't see how that would be grounded. Any others?

Right, change occurs at the present, now. And since change requires that time passes, it is very reasonable to discuss the duration of now.

Isn't a word itself a sign?

What I'm thinking of, is more of a linear model of time. The problem being that the model really only takes into account the past. All of our experien...

I see a possible paradox here. We may draw a boundary for a special purpose. In this case the concept is being used for a specific purpose. However, W...

Well, I don't see how you can miss it, because. he clearly states that a concept may be bounded by a definition but "it need not be so". Then, we can ...

That's right, precious few of us will ever actually turn and face the future, because it's way too scary. So we just keep looking at the past, attempt...

If you refuse to understand what is written, then I can't help you to see what you deny is there. But I'll try one more time. He starts 68 with a prop...

Well, the first part of 58 is where he lays out the conditions for the apparent "contradiction". At the end, he offers a resolution. So it's only natu...

It's what you called "fictional", I called it "imaginary". Wittgenstein referred to it in this way: "'what has the colour' is not a physical object". ...

Right, so what I was pointing out, is that I thought that Wittgenstein's representation of the imaginary "red" was not quite correct (I had a slight d...

I see that section, 61-63, could be used as a strike against Platonism. The common Platonist argument is that the same idea, concept, or information, ...

Replace "red" with the made up colour, let's call it "X". Suppose someone proposes that we combine a specified multiplicity of precise wavelengths of ...

It is implied that red is a thing which exists when we say things like "red is a colour". So we do use red in this way, like if I were to say "I know ...