You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

aletheist

Comments

Sorry, that is not how logical impossibility is defined. It would have to be something that is impossible for anyone even to conceive (like a square c...
December 26, 2018 at 03:37
One more time: The fact that no one can actually pair all of the integers with corresponding even numbers has no bearing whatsoever on its logical pos...
December 25, 2018 at 20:36
It illustrates that actual impossibility does not entail logical impossibility. No; the whole point here is that pairing the members of infinite sets ...
December 24, 2018 at 17:56
You might finally be on to something there, depending on exactly what you mean by it.
December 24, 2018 at 16:50
It would help if you actually understood the rules of infinity that mathematicians recognize, which are different from the rules of finite quantities;...
December 24, 2018 at 16:47
As usual, equating the logical with the actual leads to absurdity. Logical possibility is much broader than actual possibility. If pigs had large and ...
December 24, 2018 at 16:45
You can do all kinds of things with infinity mathematically, but what you cannot do is treat it as if it were just another quantity. Infinity is a dif...
December 24, 2018 at 15:42
Because an infinite interval is not composed of infinitely many finite intervals. Until you understand that, we will continue going in circles.
December 24, 2018 at 15:18
Are you still convinced of your definition of "convinced," even though you know of reasons to doubt your definition of "convinced"--such as @"DingoJon...
December 24, 2018 at 15:10
That is actual impossibility, not logical impossibility. It is completely irrelevant to pure mathematics--the science of drawing necessary conclusions...
December 24, 2018 at 15:00
If your first statement were true, then your second statement would also be true. But your first statement is false, so your second statement is also ...
December 24, 2018 at 14:56
A proposition is not contradictory merely by virtue of stating something that is actually impossible, only if it states something that is logically im...
December 24, 2018 at 01:20
Only by adopting the additional axiom--an assumption, not an argument--that everything is an effect.
December 23, 2018 at 20:22
No, it is not. Like all mathematical theories, set theory--especially as applied to infinite sets--is based on certain hypothetical formalizations tha...
December 23, 2018 at 20:20
Mathematical infinity is not actual infinity. Which part of this do you still not understand?
December 23, 2018 at 16:25
Please pay attention. Arguments for a First Mover consistently affirm that every effect has a cause. What they deny is that everything is an effect; s...
December 23, 2018 at 16:24
One more time: Mathematical infinity is not an actual infinity, but it is a real infinity. If we paired up every number with its square, when would we...
December 23, 2018 at 16:13
That does not follow at all. Again, your fundamental assumption is that everything is an effect--i.e., everything has a beginning--which is precisely ...
December 23, 2018 at 15:59
The integers (negative and positive) comprise an infinite linear sequence. What is its first member? Which integer does not have a predecessor?
December 22, 2018 at 23:02
As summarized by Wikipedia, the arrow paradox states, "If everything is motionless at every instant, and time is entirely composed of instants, then m...
December 22, 2018 at 22:57
I said nothing whatsoever about "equal amount" or "infinite interval," concepts that mistakenly treat infinity as if it were extremely large, but stil...
December 22, 2018 at 22:50
Again, that is not how it works. There are twice as many integers as even numbers within any finite (and even) interval, but neither the set of all in...
December 22, 2018 at 20:23
That is not how real numbers work. By such (il)logic, there should be twice as many integers as even numbers, which is also not the case. A discrete c...
December 22, 2018 at 17:27
What is the warrant for believing that absolutely everything is an effect caused by something else? How is it any more "logical" than believing that t...
December 20, 2018 at 22:52
The mistake is assuming that, in itself, any arbitrary portion of space-time has any granularity--i.e., discreteness--at all. Likewise!
December 20, 2018 at 22:48
It also smuggles in the premise that everything is an effect, which is precisely what proponents of an unmoved mover deny.
December 20, 2018 at 22:39
As soon as you talk about comparing the "amount" of something, you are quantifying it, and thereby treating it as discrete--i.e., begging the question...
December 20, 2018 at 22:37
Yes, I did. ... or in this case, a "region of space-time."
December 20, 2018 at 22:02
No, that progress itself through the space-time continuum (i.e., motion) is the fundamental reality; any discrete subdivisions of space and time are o...
December 20, 2018 at 21:40
In Peirce's model of a true continuum, the infinity is potential rather than actual. The real is not coextensive with the actual (existence); there ar...
December 20, 2018 at 16:50
No, that axiom is maintained throughout. Again, the actual argument is that there must be a cause that is not an effect of some other cause. Only in a...
December 20, 2018 at 16:45
Contradictions indicate an underlying logic error; paradoxes indicate a need to think more carefully. How many times must I repeat that I am arguing f...
December 20, 2018 at 16:40
Only by ignoring the fact that the whole point of arguments for an unmoved mover is that there must be a first cause that is not itself an effect of s...
December 20, 2018 at 16:33
No doubt they would say the same about your arguments here. You remain wedded to the mathematics of discrete quantity. Again, there are no points on a...
December 20, 2018 at 16:28
On the contrary ... As eternal and necessary being, the unmoved mover is not an effect; so this "axiom" is irrelevant to the argument.
December 20, 2018 at 16:24
All I can suggest at this point is looking into the standard mathematics of infinity. I side with Peirce, rather than Cantor, in denying that the real...
December 20, 2018 at 16:17
I gather than you mean deductive logic in this context, but that can only guarantee the derivation of true conclusions from true premises; it can neit...
December 20, 2018 at 16:04
Yet again: Because space-time is a true continuum, motion/velocity is a more fundamental reality than either position or duration. We can construct a ...
December 20, 2018 at 15:46
An argument from incredulity is not persuasive, and alleging "magic" suggests a lack of interest in engaging in serious philosophical discussion. What...
December 20, 2018 at 14:58
Why? It begs the question to presuppose discrete units of "information" (i.e., points or finite segments) that comprise a "real line." Again, the "par...
December 20, 2018 at 14:30
It is a true continuum, such that an instant with no duration, or even a very small finite duration, is a strictly hypothetical discontinuity. Rather ...
December 20, 2018 at 02:45
What do words like "unicorn" and "phoenix" represent? If your statement is correct, how are we able to talk about things and events that are in the fu...
October 20, 2018 at 23:00
The play itself cannot and does not create anything. Shakespeare created the idea of a man named Hamlet who was once the prince of Denmark, and then w...
October 20, 2018 at 20:08
You answered your own question in how you asked it - the proposition asserts a (purported) fact, rather than being a (purported) fact. The difference ...
October 20, 2018 at 15:29
That is precisely what Peirce and I mean by "hypothetical states of affairs" as the subject matter of pure mathematics - there is no connection (purpo...
October 19, 2018 at 17:43
I agree, but I can see how I might have given a different impression above. Charles Peirce, following his father Benjamin - one of the most accomplish...
October 19, 2018 at 14:58
This happens all the time. Shakespeare wrote a play that represents a man named Hamlet who was prince of Denmark. No such person ever actually existed...
October 19, 2018 at 14:50
Apology accepted, although I am still curious - what did you think it meant, such that you suspected me of being comfortable with incoherence/self-con...
October 19, 2018 at 02:59
These two statements are not contradictory. Not all mammals are dogs. All dogs are mammals. In any case, here is what I actually said about facts. Unr...
October 19, 2018 at 02:54
Please point out my self-contradiction, so that I may correct it. What do you think it means?
October 19, 2018 at 01:38