Yes, now do you see the point? An object is always an object with an essence, so the essence is separable from the object. Now go back to the argument...
You're just refusing to justify you terms, inter-subjectivity, and shared experience of subjects. I do not think that it is possible that my experienc...
The problem is that these ideas do become objectified in epistemology. Most epistemologies hold that some knowledge is objective, and therefore certai...
Yes, all objects have an essence. That's what makes any particular object intelligible to us, its essence. And each particular object has a particular...
Sure, all definitions are claims, you have to start somewhere with your argument, it's called a premise. If you don't like what I refer to as the esse...
Yes, that's how I define "essence", basically as what the object is. It is the traditional way, from Aristotle. Each object has it's own particular pr...
Analyzing the way that we use the words is only the beginning in Platonic dialectics. From this analysis we can come to the conclusion that there must...
I follow a traditional definition of "natural", which opposes natural to artificial. Therefore an artificial thing is not natural. If someone wants to...
But I am saying the opposite of that, that we can analyze these things for what they are, independent of our judgements. You put beauty in the eye of ...
I think that Platonic dialectics demonstrate that these things are analyzable. What he did was to analyze the different ways in which each of the diff...
How does the fact that human beings can produce certain chemicals essential to life prove that these chemicals can be produced without life? That conc...
The ambiguity is expressed by the premises of special relativity as the relativity of simultaneity. If we consider that "reality" refers to what "is" ...
I guess I like stating everything in the most convoluted way possible. But here's the thing, it's just an opinion, an attitude, a belief that it would...
Well, I already said that I don't think it's wise to even believe that there is anything in existence which cannot be conceived. And as I defined conc...
I would not equate conceiving with thinking of, or perceiving. If this were the case, then other creatures which think and perceive would have concept...
Then it would not be a conception, it would be a misconception. A supposed conception, which contains a contradiction is really a misconception. That'...
How you prove such things is to demonstrate that they are contradictory. So you would need to define "circle", and "square" in such a way that the two...
What I've been discussing with Moliere, is that there is no need for him to know that the item is a chair, nor is there a need for him to know what a ...
Well, consider "the apple is red". This phrase might be referring to a particular object on the table which appears to be red, and we might therefore ...
The hidden variable is the concept of activity itself. Notice how you say, "in a double slit experiment with a particle". You are misrepresenting the ...
So if you don't recognize these two distinct types of meaning, then how do you account for the difference between truth by correspondence and truth by...
I have looked it up. And I've watched the clip Wayfarer provided above, thank you Wayfarer. Furthermore, I know very well what a variable is, and I kn...
So, the point Andrew M, I am a metaphysician, not even a physicist, and I can identify numerous possible hidden variables, such as gravity, expansion ...
It's redundant to say there is no evidence for hidden variables. If there was evidence, they wouldn't be hidden. But "evidence" is a property of the m...
I am not conflating, I am separating. You have been attempting to deny the existence of the semantic meaning of X, claiming that it only has a mathema...
Well you've totally lost me. If meaning is what a word means, and I can know what "apple" means, and knowing is a capacity, then how can you say "mean...
X represents a known and defined object, "the number of times that I went to the store last week". Clearly you're wrong to say that we don't know what...
This is Aristotelian logic. The concept "animal" is within the concept "man", because "man" is defined by "animal". Animal is within the definition of...
But X does not represent an unknown quantity, it represents a defined object "Let X = ..." The task of the mathematician is to assign a numerical valu...
OK, so back to my original question then. When a child learning language knows how to point to the proper object when the word "apple" is spoken, does...
I don't understand what you wrote. Created things are contingent, they are dependent on God as the cause of their existence. God exists necessarily. T...
But these aren't two types of definition, one is a definition, the other a direct relating the word to an object. The latter is knowing what "apple" m...
Let's consider this example for a moment then. Suppose a baby manipulates its mother to get what it wants, food. Next the child starts to see that it ...
So isn't it necessary to distinguish between meaning in sense #1, and meaning in sense #2 then? If we don't maintain this distinction there could be a...
Here's a slight problem. When I say I know what "tomato" means, does this mean that I can ring off an acceptable definition as you have, or does this ...
There are existing things, and God created them. God's creation is other than God. You seem to be thinking of pantheism which is somewhat different fr...
Yes, they can be arbitrary. That's the point, we can build a structure of meaning on an arbitrary definition. Whether or not the stipulated meaning is...
This isn't entirely true. A person can stipulate a definition as a premise, for the purpose of deductive argument. The logical argument, and others wh...
All you need to do is read the first section of Summa Theologica. Here's the gist of Pt1,Q3, Art1: "I answer that God is not only His own essence, as ...
Well stated, that is exactly Socrates' attitude, and the position we should all take, including the high level physicists. Many already have this atti...
It's not that we must doubt the existence of objects if we do not know the cause. You know we can live without knowing the cause. But if we want to fi...
Do you recognize two approaches to one's own value judgements? First, we could automatically start acting on the values, we'd be constantly working on...
When you declare bankruptcy to ditch your creditors, you're a winner because a new door has opened to you? What about the creditors? The only reason t...
He's into Loop Quantum Gravity, did some work on string theory, but seems to think that may be a dead end. I read Time Reborn. I liked it because it c...
Huh? I was told, you win some, you lose some, and this I think is true. What's with this notion that everything is either black or white? Where is the...
I'm trying to work out what exactly you mean by "value" Gooseone. As I said in my last post, I really don't agree with the concept of "value judgement...
Comments