Fair enough. I'm confusing all manner of abstract Forms with their Material supports. So much for my theory of how belief in abstract mental furniture...
So, after the careless generalising, a strenuous particularizing. Ok then, take two: Please elaborate, for the benefit of those for whom sentences wou...
Not meaning it literally: A book literally contains sentences and images. Many societies encourage the view that brains do, too. I would need persuadi...
Also, people spooking you out on a magic mushrooms forum reminds me that the wisdom proffered in my linked post probably derives from some very helpfu...
I was ready to be schooled in information theory, or some such. But you revert to a pre-philosophical declaration of wonder. Which is fine. Don't you ...
Ok, what are they for you? haha, at least that needn't be a substantive issue. I just meant, believing in mental furniture. Whatever you want to call ...
That, to me, is mentalism: confusing thoughts (neurological events) with pictures (or other symbols) and with pictured (or otherwise symbolised) objec...
... leading on, we hope, to reconception of and improvement on the received wisdom. (Leading on to another round, etc.) I always assumed that an "intu...
Yes, but it doesn't have to be that specious and spurious difference. It only has to be the difference between an ordinary zombie such as a smart phon...
Not all matter is wet, even in the slightest degree, but liquids usually are. Not all matter is (phenomenally, of course) conscious, even in the sligh...
A declarative sentence is the standard linguistic device for pointing a word at one or more objects. An assertion is the device in operation. Why is i...
I can't make a passing theory of what you meant, here. If it were mandatory that the statement were an assertion, then the turnstile would add somethi...
Clarification, please? If it were... mandatory that the statement was an assertion? ...or, mandatory that it needed or allowed specifying as such? ......
The creatures dominant on this planet hold a great many beliefs, beyond the findings of their excellent sciences. Perhaps most fundamental, deeper eve...
You wrote the puzzle :wink: :up: Cool, e.g., For all choices of x, not yurg without blue. (Could be zero yurgs.) No, but their negations, yes. E.g., F...
Yes, being asked to deny the non-existence of yurgs of a certain type is being asked to affirm their existence, surely? If you are disconcerted by tha...
I was reminded of this (for me) very embarrassing thread when quoting Quine here: Doesn't it at least deny: 1) ?x~(Px & ~Dx) I.e. for all choices of x...
I doubt it has the intended effect. It implies that you are only concerned about what is relevant to the linguistic aspects, and are perfectly prepare...
Vote no. And, if Alice is saying something, must we (can we) conclude there is some sort of a thing entering into a binary "is saying" relation with A...
Because only whole sentences can be true, whereas only parts of sentences can correspond to reality. The correspondence relation is sometimes called "...
E.g. isn't Wittgenstein's aim (with his linguistical speculation) to dissolve or reconceive the second one, not to entrench it? I guess that you and h...
Comments