Terrapin Station

Okay, but it's important to clarify that nothing belonging to the object exists prior to the object, nothing that's at all a property of the object, b...

I'd say that there's a difference between what you personally take as necessary to believe that something is objective (which isn't the same thing I r...

I don't believe I've ever read anything by him, no. I'll try to check some out.

No. The words refer to the idea you have, your imagination of it.

Maybe I misread that previous post of yours then. I thought you were saying that the haecceity of the object is at T1 but the object's haecceity is on...

What is the difference between the object's haecceity and the haecceity of the object?

Not really interested. You should be able to understand what I wrote in the context of the current conversation.

So on your view, how we interpret mathematical equations as theories has implications for whether it's as if the scientific method never happened beca...

Not offhand--I'd have to search for some. What I had in mind is both people I personally know or have known and statements I've encountered over the y...

I don't know if there's a single sentence in your post that's not confused or just plain wrong. Let's take it sentence by sentence. This is confused b...

Ah--well, I wouldn't use "observational" in that way, since it's rather a construction, but if you use "observational" so that it would fit that, then...

I'm always good for tedium.

When I read something like this, my first thought is always, "Why the heck would we believe that?" Of course, as I read, I saw that you gave an answer...

Haha

Okay, but if the object in question only comes into existence at T2, then that particular object doesn't have its essence (or haecceity) at T1, right?

That's simply playing a game of sorts per rules that one has set up beforehand. The rules are complex enough (and vary enough per different sorts of s...

How can there be something at time T1 that comes into existence as an object at time T2?

Ah--so you're just getting at the idea of platonic forms, basically? I don't at all buy that ontologically. Only dynamic structures/relations of matte...

Re this tangential conversation (at least it's tangential in my view), I was answering this question: "why should I care whether I am obtuse or acute,...

One problem though is that he used the phrase "logical deduction." It's kind of difficult to make a case that he wasn't referring to logic in the sens...

Which is what I'm referring to by (1) (It was my formulation after all!--you can't tell me what it was referring to contra what I had in mind!). There...

Yeah, I wouldn't know that either. We'd probably need to ask someone who claimed something like that. Re the rest of your comment, what I was getting ...

Right, you're saying that (1) obtains prior to the object coming to be, which is what makes it contradictory. There's no object to have an essence pri...

;-)

The reasons you'd care about those sorts of things don't usually have anything to do with posting on message boards. They usually have to do with whet...

It's just a matter of what people consider an explanation or not. And a large percentage of relevant academics consider mathematical equations read in...

I'm an anti-realist on mathematics. I don't believe that any mathematics is an accurate representation of reality, because I don't believe there is an...

Why in the world would we be talking about "burdens"? And who is asking about a "proof" of anything? I thought we'd be capable of having a conversatio...

I have zero interest in you "explaining the issue." What I'm interested in is you telling me what the infinite regress sentences would have to be in t...

The contradiction is in: (1) That is an object with an essence & (2) The object hasn't come to be yet. (1) is the object being something--an object wi...

If yes, then what I'm asking you is to give how the implied, infinite-regress sentences would have to go.

So yes or no does the set of sentences I presented entail an infinite regress? (Just answer yes or no or explain why you can not just answer yes or no...

Again, I'm asking you to explain infinite regress specifically with the sentences I've put into quotation marks and ONLY with respect to those specifi...

Yes, I'd agree with "there are no two logically identical instances of meaning." Obviously, on my view, logically identical, multiple instances of mea...

I don't buy that we can observe a multiplicative relation or that mathematics is observational.

??? I was explaining in slightly different words why the idea you're suggesting is a logical contradiction.

The comment you're responding to here was about you reading my earlier comment as an epistemic rather than an ontological claim. Yet your response her...

Right, so it is something at that point--an object with an essence. So when you say "an object can't be anything prior to coming to be" that means tha...

The problem I see with this is that we're not mapping F=ma to F equaling m times a in experience, because there is no mathematical equality or multipl...

Wait, why are we saying that models involve transformation rules and analysis? For example, let's pick something simple. Say F=ma as a mathematical mo...

It dynamically "blossomed" from every property of every particular in a long causal chain (properties themselves being particulars on my view), as wel...

If there's an object with an essence, than the object is something (an object with an essence).

Haha--okay. Saying that all mathematical models would be examples of necessary reasoning seems dubious to me.

That's actually not what I'm saying, by the way. It's not necessary that you complete goals for this. Just that you work towards them. Some goals you ...

First I want to make sure that I'm clear on what you're claiming in this sentence and why you're claiming it. What is the source for that being what m...

First, you're not reading "work" so that it's simply denoting something like "employment," are you? It's "working on oneself," rather. Why is it that ...

Would you say that's all he was doing in Passions of the Soul or in the physics sections of Principles of Philosophy, say?

For one, it seems odd that you'd have the complaints about philosophy that you do--it all went to Hell beginning with scholasticism, for example (have...

First, that's just a claim--it's not really an argument. Aside from that, it's contradictory. If essence is "what an object is," then it's contradicto...

It affects how most people feel about themselves and how they interact with other people, which has a significant impact on how most people feel about...