Dfpolis

How would one distinguish Fregean propositions from judgements? If they aren't judgements, what reality do they have? Putting, "the hope that p" in th...

This seems a contradiction in terms. Semantically, we have a sign (the sentence), the interpretation (the intentional state elicited by the sentence),...

I have no doubt that the two readings express different judgements (intentional existents). Still I have several questions. Can one distinguish two id...

There is confusion because ethics is not about convincing people what to do. It is about deciding what is the right thing to do. Plato believed that i...

You might still convince me if you clarified what you mean by "objective" and provided a rational argument instead of a dogma to be accepted. For me, ...

Exactly. By specifying S we can easily define what we mean by possibility in various contexts.

It seems to me that this analysis is incomplete. It's surely true that Donald Trump is Donald Trump, no matter what you call him. So, if you read the ...

So, I am to accept this as a faith claim? And, with no explanation of what you even mean by "Objective access to 'the world'" -- despite my explicit r...

I have been thinking about this since I started the thread. In never thought of possible worlds as real, because what is merely possible is not actual...

You have to define what you mean by "objective" before I can agree or disagree with the premise. As for the conclusion, it is clearly in error. As it ...

The "symbolic jargon" was not used to define the real world, but "possible." I have said earlier, that the referent of "reality" is what is experience...

I responded to this question at length in my 5th post on the thread (a response to MindForged). He did not respond to the points I made on this topic....

I want to thank all the participants of the thread for an illuminating discussion and some of you for correcting some ignorant misunderstandings on my...

By "actual" I mean operational or able to act. As mere hypotheticals can't act, the aren't actually facts. OK. As long as the things and states are ac...

I understand what you are saying, but it is not how I'd define "metaphysically necessary." There is no metaphysical reason a chess bishop can't move l...

You seem very sensible, and I don't object to what you are saying. I have no problem in saying that if I'm talking about possibilities with respect to...

ok

This is like saying that a map with a misprint is not worth anymore than a possible map. Touche! Fair enough. I was imprecise. Mea culpa. I had my dou...

No, I am not under that impression. I think all terms are conventional. Only ideas cannot mean anything but what they mean, because their whole being ...

Exactly. Therefore, they can't have the same proper name, only homonymous proper names.

Precisely. It is a matter of how one constructs their possible worlds and then chooses to identify their components. As there is no reality involved, ...

I do not deny the existence of other universes in a multiverse, or even independently. I am only saying that, as we are not in dynamic contact with th...

I can. I said : Logical possibility means the proposition is consistent with S = the facts we know. Physical possibility means the proposition is cons...

It depends on how you define "metaphysically necessary." Can you define it without invoking possible worlds semantics? If not, how can this claim be r...

OK, but that leaves me wondering how it was an objection? You also said: This seems an attempt to give possible worlds the same epistemological status...

I am sorry, I accidentally clicked post before I was done, and there seems to be no way of undoing a post. So I continued in another post. That part o...

The full objection was: I am sorry if my shorthand reference to my objection was misleading. The objection is that since we can't know what the denize...

If you read the full objection, you'd see that this is a rhetorical step, not the full objection.

The SEP article is what I read.

I agree. My main problem with possible worlds semantics is pragmatic. By placing a layer of construct between reality, which alone can be a source of ...

Perceptions aren't simply physical states, they're intentional states. While physical states have no intrinsic significance, intentional states do. Pe...

Of course we have access to our own world. The dogma of an epistic gap is nonsense to anyone schooled in Aristotle. For example, an object's modificat...

According to the SEP: If possible worlds talk is nonsense, then rigid designators are undefined.

He he

The argument seems to be that it is a way of explaining modality and subjective probability. E.g. "necessary" means in all possible worlds. A subjecti...

Yes, there is a difference between perception on the one hand and imagination or delusion on the other. I just don't think that it is philosophically ...

I don't see that this implies "linguistic competence." Obviously there is some historical point at which language use began. I don't think that that p...

Yes. As I have said in other threads, natural science begins with a fundamental abstraction that fixes attention on the objects of the physical world ...

Yes. The paradoxes are the result of refusing to let go of Greek atomism and insisting, against all the evidence, that quanta are both particles and w...

The name for that is "prejudicial thinking." Sadly, it is all too common both in society as a whole and in science in particular.

The list of questions is a hodge-podge showing little reflection. Some (such as the existence of God) belong to metaphysics or natural theology. Other...

I suspect this is simply a matter of defining "representation" differently, and not a difference about fact. One can have a representation without bei...

In the sentence "a is a" "a" is used formally. That is to say that it refers to some (generalized) object beyond itself. In the sentence " a is not a ...

Smelling vanilla is an existential state. It might indicate the presence of vanilla extract, vanilla beans, good vanilla ice cream, etc. Since it can ...

Exactly

Qualia are contingent forms of awareness. They are not symbols because they have no intrinsic or conventional meaning. The smell of vanilla is the qua...

Sure. As I have said, we need to look at the detailed physics of the measurement process, instead of treating it abstractly. When we do, we see how th...

This is not a sensible response. So, it is time to end this conversation.

There is no intrinsic mystery. I talked about both types of uncertainty mentioned by Greene in my response, but perhaps not with sufficient clarity. T...

Pretty much. I think that so-called particles are quantized wave structures, as modeled by QFT. I think that annihilation and creation operators mask ...