Terrapin Station

"Located" adds nothing there. "Where is my location" is the same thing. It makes no sense to say that's not a location.

It has a location--a lot of them, actually because that's what space is. Locations aren't literally in a container (that is space). Space is the exten...

Your objection was that it would make no sense to say that locations have no location? Ohhhkay.

So if you had a universe of two locations, for example, it might be the case that each location is two meters to the right or alternately the left of ...

They are locations, and locations are always defined in terms of relative extensional relations. It would make no sense to say that locations have no ...

It's in the tradition of treating truth as a property of propositions. (Where propositions are usually understood as the meanings of statements.)

You can say "within space." It's a manner of speaking about extensional relations. That's what space is.

It's ontology/metaphysics. Science doesn't really comment on it either way. I'm a nominalist on the nominalism vs realism (on universals/types) issue.

Space is location. It's the extension of matter/the extensional relations of matter. Space isnt something that exists "on its own," independent of mat...

This is reposting something I've posted here a number of times over the years, but here it is again: ‘P’ is true for S iff S judges ‘P’ to have relati...

Correct, they're not going to be identical, but they can be as similar as, say, two copies of a music CD. Sure it does. It is all locations of time an...

I buy that there are propositions. I don't buy that there is anything with no location in time or space. On my view, meaning is mental, and mentality ...

Sure, I'd say it is. Remember that propositions are the meanings of statements. So it's the meaning of something like, "My keys are on the dresser." W...

Do you discover that through inquiry? (I'm also a relativist, by the way.)

Since I know we won't resolve what counts as empirical or not, and I think this is worth commenting on, I'll start a second thread for you to argue wi...

They're all flawed. Most arguments in philosophy in general, proportional to the extent to which they're presented more formally as arguments, are pre...

Yes it is. Maybe look up "empirical" in a dictionary? Let's settle this part before moving on to additional issues.

How are you encountering other people to agree with, by the way?

Just curious what those experiences and observations were.

He's just saying that if you use the variable to refer to something, then that thing exists as something, whether it's just an idea or description or ...

They're not the same only in the way that a Yorkshire Terrier and "dog" are not the same.

What has to do with identification is "Jesus is God." There's something we're calling "Jesus" and something we're calling "God." If they turn out to b...

It doesn't exclude change, it only excludes equivocation. Whatever you're referring to with "A" needs to be the same in all instances of "A." Otherwis...

Which is similar to saying that all anyone takes is situated in their own manusive experience. Well, yeah. Duh. You have to use your arm/hand to take ...

You're not going to understand it if you don't think about it in a focused way. The questions are designed to do that. What I should have asked you wa...

Oy vey. I'm trying--unsuccessfully, apparently--to impart an understanding of the issue re "matching" or "corresponding."

It's obviously not literally "a picture in words." How could it amount to being "a picture in words" aside from someone thinking about it that way?

And a description isn't the same as what it's describing but it has what relationship instead?

So matching isn't a matter of them being the same. What is it a matter of instead?

Your experience is subjective, but what it's experience of often isn't subjective. Imagine we have the word "manusive," defined as "of an arm or hand....

You're not understanding the issue I'm getting at. Given that, how can you say whether the questions I'm asking are relevant to understanding it?

What? I'm asking you questions in order to try to give you a better idea of what the issue is.

You're not understanding the issue here. Describing a cat being on a mat isn't identical to the thing in question, is it? And neither is the meaning t...

I'm not sure what you're thinking of, but no, that's not what I would have said. But I'll work with it for a moment. "If that state of affairs is actu...

Right, and I'm asking you to specify the details of how the matching obtains. We have the meaning in the person's head and we have a fact. What determ...

So "The dog is on the rug," in terms of meaning, is a set of mental states in someone's head. You said that you agree with that. So how do we go from ...

I'm not at all ready to say that there's anything negative about it without a pretty good argument, backed by empirical evidence, for something that I...

Again, we need to detail how. So pick an example and detail it. It doesn't work to just claim that it's the case. That's not good enough. I can just c...

Yeah, I read you as saying that you don't think that meaning is mental. So once a meaning is created, which is an event in someone's head, then the wa...

I do, and I don't think there's any way to make it extramental at any point. You'd need to argue how it can be extramental or at least how it can be m...

I just added this while you were typing: We can't be talking about meaning, which is what is usually taken to be what a proposition is, because meanin...

Right, so we're talking about what matching, text marks that look like this: "The dog is on the rug"? Those sounds, or what? We can't be talking about...

How would that work? We'd need to be able to describe/detail the process. What I'm challenging is that there's no way for it to work outside of minds....

It's an interesting issue when we're talking about younger folks (like your age, Wallows, or younger) who spend a significant percentage of their time...

The matching would have to be objective. That is, it would have to be a property of extramental things. How are we supposed to arrive at extramental m...

What's stupid about it is that it's believed despite the complete lack of any cogent support for it. It's as bad as religious belief. Come up with a g...

I don't see how this answers the question I asked you. My question is whether you're more certain about one particular claim than another, and then I'...

The reason I agree that there is no objective truth is because of a "technical" issue re truth in analytic philosophy that I described above. (Truth i...

Don't forget to answer: "You'd say that you're more certain that the experiences stem from a world that doesn't exist aside from our minds?"

Nope. I'm literally asking you a question about whether taking a cookie is actually just your arm/hand, since it's something your arm/hand are doing, ...