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

aletheist

Comments

It has nothing to do with how I consider it. The movement does not actually consist of an infinite series of separate, discrete steps. It is simply a ...
February 24, 2017 at 15:56
I still think that this is an overreaction. We can still use mathematics for describing certain life experiences, depending on our purpose in doing so...
February 24, 2017 at 15:41
Yes, you pass each of those arbitrarily identified "points"; but each instance of doing so is not a separate, discrete step in the continuous motion o...
February 24, 2017 at 15:40
We do not have to treat every halfway point as a discrete step in the motion from the start of that 100-m line to its end. We can traverse the one ful...
February 24, 2017 at 15:17
Yes, I agree. What remains unclear to me is what it means to say that the principle of identity does not apply to something. Zalamea helpfully formali...
February 24, 2017 at 14:30
This is probably good advice, and I will try to heed it going forward. Sorry to nitpick, but is "contradiction" the right word here? In accordance wit...
February 24, 2017 at 02:59
He never said that you were wrong. He merely said that Zalamea said the opposite of what you said. What gave you that idea? I thought that was also un...
February 24, 2017 at 01:21
Really? That was not my intention at all. I was just trying to moderate a dispute between two of my favorite PF participants. What? Why would that be ...
February 23, 2017 at 23:37
I see nothing insulting about pointing out a discrepancy between what you wrote here and what is claimed in a paper that you recommended. I have alrea...
February 23, 2017 at 23:19
The actual is that which is neither vague nor general by these definitions - both principles apply to it. The tricky part is that this notion of absol...
February 23, 2017 at 23:08
Again, @"fishfry" simply pointed out something that Zalamea claims in the paper that you recommended, which is contrary to your own comments. I took h...
February 23, 2017 at 22:52
Come now - this is not @"fishfry"'s own claim, but Zalamea's, in the very paper that you recommended. The later discussion linking category theory wit...
February 23, 2017 at 22:23
Would you mind clarifying exactly what you mean by "analytic" and "synthetic" in this context? That is not how I understand it, unless by "constrained...
February 23, 2017 at 22:18
Thanks for your comments and clarification.
February 23, 2017 at 22:13
Ah, okay; it was (obviously) not obvious to me, since I generally assume - unless there is a clear indication otherwise - that a reply to one of my co...
February 23, 2017 at 21:08
Thanks for yet another helpful clarification.
February 23, 2017 at 20:25
What exactly is it that you think I am not comprehending? Sincere question, I am eager to learn. If it is a theorem that has been proved, then it foll...
February 23, 2017 at 20:13
It is a mistake to treat accuracy and success in the actual world as the only legitimate objectives of inquiry. For one thing, it is inconsistent with...
February 23, 2017 at 19:04
This right here is precisely the reason why we have been at such loggerheads throughout this discussion (and others). As I keep saying over and over, ...
February 23, 2017 at 18:05
Not when "cardinality" is defined as a specific property of infinite sets. There are no inconsistencies or contradictions within the hypothetical real...
February 23, 2017 at 14:54
Peirce acknowledged this - as soon as we talk or even think about a color or other quality, it is no longer 1ns in itself.
February 23, 2017 at 14:50
My only exposure to category theory (so far) is Zalamea's paper, which I am in the process of rereading because I suspect that it will make even more ...
February 23, 2017 at 14:48
He might very well understand it, he just refuses to accept it. He is committed to the presupposition that only the actual is real, so if something is...
February 23, 2017 at 14:12
No, it is a deductive conclusion that is necessarily true, given the standard mathematical/set-theoretic definition of countable/denumerable/enumerabl...
February 23, 2017 at 14:08
No, I understand his 1ns in itself to be quality as possibility, or unembodied quality; medad rather than monadic predicate. Anything brute and/or act...
February 23, 2017 at 04:53
I was delighted to learn this evening that Zalamea has agreed to a "slow read" of this very paper via the Peirce-L e-mail list in the near future. If ...
February 23, 2017 at 03:29
Peirce: "If we are to explain the universe, we must assume that there was in the beginning a state of things in which there was nothing, no reaction a...
February 23, 2017 at 03:08
In this context, do you basically see continuity as 3ns, discreteness as 2ns, and possibility as 1ns? Given that existence is 2ns, do you generally pr...
February 23, 2017 at 02:46
I have no reason to doubt that you are correct about this. Thanks for another helpful clarification, especially since @"tom" chose for some reason not...
February 23, 2017 at 02:33
I am neither a mathematician nor a philosopher, but that statement seems consistent with the claim that the real numbers do not qualify as a true cont...
February 22, 2017 at 23:06
I doubt it, since I have been clearly saying all along that a true continuum is not made up of "individual points or their aggregates." I might even a...
February 22, 2017 at 22:22
We typically treat the two values as equal, but arguably there is an infinitesimal (non-zero) difference between them. As you might have guessed, the ...
February 22, 2017 at 22:13
Are your comments directed at any particular person or post?
February 22, 2017 at 21:48
It obviously does not yield an unbroken continuum. More real numbers, all of which are distinct; again, it obviously does not yield an unbroken contin...
February 22, 2017 at 21:33
Right - the real numbers constitute an analytic continuum, but not a synthetic continuum; i.e., a true continuum in the Peircean sense, which cannot b...
February 22, 2017 at 21:05
An analytic continuum (real numbers), or a true continuum (Peircean)? How is that significant in the context of this thread?
February 22, 2017 at 18:56
It is trivially true that no representation reproduces its object in every respect, and the purpose of musical notes - and mathematical symbols/equati...
February 22, 2017 at 04:53
But without that representation, you would not be able to play that particular piece of music at all, unless it happened to be one that you composed y...
February 22, 2017 at 04:11
Indeed, but @"Metaphysician Undercover" only accepts this definition if we divorce it from the colloquial meaning of "countable," which according to h...
February 21, 2017 at 23:05
Agreed, and likewise. I certainly do not believe that one must share all of a thinker's presuppositions and commitments in order to understand his/her...
February 21, 2017 at 22:59
But this is an online forum, not an academic debate. Oops, putting it that way is likely to have the opposite effect of what I intend ... :s Look, you...
February 21, 2017 at 22:25
Agreed, and you probably understand a lot more of the non-Peircean content than I do. :)
February 21, 2017 at 21:33
Perhaps, but it seems to me that we have then already conceded that the real numbers do not and cannot constitute a true continuum. They are now just ...
February 21, 2017 at 21:15
Right, and a continuum is "that of which every part has parts of the same kind," so obviously a continuous line cannot contain any points. When we mar...
February 21, 2017 at 20:53
That is indeed a terrific paper, but it gets pretty technical and might be tough to follow for someone not already acquainted with Peirce's thought. T...
February 21, 2017 at 20:47
That is really what my first question is asking. @"Rich" seems pretty convinced, but I am still trying to make up my own mind, especially since I adhe...
February 21, 2017 at 20:43
Is there an a posteriori way of determining whether there are any real continua vs. everything (including space and time) being discrete? As I stated ...
February 21, 2017 at 19:51
As I asked in the OP, is it possible to determine whether there are any real continua vs. everything (including space and time) being discrete? If so,...
February 21, 2017 at 19:09
Your opinion is duly noted. :-}
February 21, 2017 at 18:58
Why would I want or need to "prove" or "justify" a generic definition of "x-able" that I have (repeatedly) stipulated?
February 21, 2017 at 18:32