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

bongo fury

Comments

In: Assertion  — view comment
Whatever narrower psychological sense of "perform" or "assert" makes us disqualify an otherwise appropriate sound event from being a performance, or a...
July 15, 2025 at 11:53
In: Assertion  — view comment
Yes, we have many performances of the same song (from copies of the same score). Let's reify tokens vs type. But no, they aren't later on disqualified...
July 15, 2025 at 10:13
In: Assertion  — view comment
My point is, there you almost go... reifying the act and the performing of it as distinct things.
July 14, 2025 at 23:25
In: Assertion  — view comment
Well, we do have "the question whether or not... "
July 14, 2025 at 23:15
In: Assertion  — view comment
Why not performed that performance, acted that act, etc... Human linguistic behaviour is no doubt infinitely varied, but let's look for system where t...
July 14, 2025 at 23:13
In: Assertion  — view comment
I'm trying to see why you think this. Have you considered referring to the "string of words"? Thus casting it as a linguistic entity of (speaking loos...
July 14, 2025 at 22:34
In: Assertion  — view comment
I would say, the mere occurrence of an assertion (claim, statement etc) doesn't amount to an assertion (claim, statement etc) of or about that asserti...
July 14, 2025 at 22:12
In: Assertion  — view comment
And 1. is no less a claim (or assertion) for lacking a personal endorsement (or other assertion sign). And the string "the cat is on the mat" is no le...
July 14, 2025 at 20:45
In: Assertion  — view comment
Rather, I think that, if you say: "an example of a proposition (assertion etc) is: 'The cat is on the mat.'" you are saying something like: "it is tru...
July 14, 2025 at 20:20
In: Assertion  — view comment
What is? I don't follow. My "it" wasn't a name, and it wasn't about a name. It was your example token of the assertion "the cat is on the mat". You ha...
July 14, 2025 at 20:13
In: Assertion  — view comment
Yes. In other words, two different assertions?
July 13, 2025 at 16:59
In: Assertion  — view comment
Is it then not an assertion? Is a name not a name when it's an example?
July 13, 2025 at 13:45
In: Assertion  — view comment
:100: Does this help with the puzzles of how and why and whether they ought?
July 13, 2025 at 11:48
In: Assertion  — view comment
There are so many points people have made that I'm highly disposed to agreeing or disagreeing with at length. In the end, I prefer one move of chess (...
July 13, 2025 at 11:24
In: Assertion  — view comment
Great, I invite people to bring that kind of thing here, if it's off topic there (or wherever).
July 13, 2025 at 11:17
In: Assertion  — view comment
Yep, I'll be trying to contribute.
July 12, 2025 at 23:24
In: Assertion  — view comment
July 12, 2025 at 23:20
In: Assertion  — view comment
Haha, no, for me it's actually philosophy big deal number one. Lately.
July 12, 2025 at 23:10
In: Assertion  — view comment
I agree that it (the solution) must be about recognising the interplay of object- and meta-language.
July 12, 2025 at 23:08
In: Assertion  — view comment
Haha, no, I do (unironically) think a sentence is an assertion sign. Alright... a naming sign.
July 12, 2025 at 22:57
In: Assertion  — view comment
I have the vaguest inkling (as yet) of it being due to the inscrutability of reference. What answer should I have known?
July 12, 2025 at 22:53
In: Assertion  — view comment
Right. I think (judge!) that distinguishing a thought from a judgement is an unnecessary complication. Hence my liking for @"Banno"'s framing.
July 12, 2025 at 22:48
In: Assertion  — view comment
I'm suggesting we play with it how we please. You can define clearer rules if you like?
July 12, 2025 at 22:31
.
July 12, 2025 at 22:10
Agreed. Agreed, e.g. (There is a winner in each play of the game, there is a richest man in each world, there is always a number greater than 7, or et...
February 18, 2025 at 20:52
Isn't that what Quine doubts? Is he wrong? How? How does possible world semantics restore coherence in the face of referential opacity? Asking for a f...
February 17, 2025 at 20:02
Agreed. Not necessarily, but the claim wants explaining. What is meant to be wrong with the slogan, and what has the doctrine of quantifiers being sec...
January 28, 2025 at 22:11
No, just the doctrine received from Frege regarding quantifiers as second-order predicates, that is, as attaching to first order predicates in the man...
January 28, 2025 at 20:44
People think: reference must be determinate because language can talk physics.
January 26, 2025 at 08:25
Yes. I guess. Not sure.
January 25, 2025 at 20:49
I assume chatbots and chromosomes are all syntax. Like Chinese rooms. And semantics is the interpretations that we (and future machines conceivably mi...
January 25, 2025 at 20:33
A splendid proposal, I say, but improvable. In a spirit of extensionalism, we may remove the thinker from the analysis, and instead form a suitable wo...
January 25, 2025 at 18:33
Another cause might be the evident separation of convention and pretence (i.e. semantics) from syntax, in many cases. We are ready to add an interpret...
January 25, 2025 at 14:11
He means a) the relation of reference not happening to be a physical relation, but instead mere convention, or pretence; and b) the possibility of det...
January 25, 2025 at 13:44
Logic is the essence of philosophy. Compare: Philosophy of science isn't science of philosophy. Philosophy of art isn't art of science. Whereas, philo...
January 09, 2025 at 13:28
To be fair, you're the one hurling the 'isms' around. The irony...
January 02, 2025 at 15:33
Again, nominalism isn't a tendency to proliferate labels. Nominalisation is closer to being that. Nominalism agrees that nominalisation tends to reify...
January 02, 2025 at 14:41
And Hypostatic Abstraction of the Haphazard kind is exacerbated by nominalists who hypocritically hypostatize the very process they like to oppose? Co...
January 01, 2025 at 13:11
But has my thought been influenced by nominalism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism?wprov=sfla1 Or has it been influenced by nominalisation? ht...
January 01, 2025 at 12:11
Influenced by which one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalization?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominalism?wprov=sfla1
January 01, 2025 at 11:42
I am? In what sense of nominalist position? That of someone disposed to nominalisation/reification/hypostatisation? Or that of someone opposed to it?
January 01, 2025 at 11:39
Ah! I've solved it :rofl: @"Mapping the Medium", you think that nominalists are people who nominalise (or nominalize), in the grammatical sense which ...
January 01, 2025 at 10:37
I mean, I don't think he does, but I'm intrigued about this thirdness stuff if it's about that.
December 31, 2024 at 23:14
He reifies the relation of reference or denotation?
December 31, 2024 at 23:06
Go on? (Edit: this was when Mapping the Medium had said "he" instead of "Banno" and I thought she (MtM) was addressing the question of mine which she ...
December 31, 2024 at 23:01
Right, so we're curious (I think someone asked at some point) whence the anti-nominalism? If Goodman says, Shouldn't that align with your objection to...
December 31, 2024 at 22:48
Yes, or i.e. to reify. Be realist about mere abstractions. The kind of error ('platonism') usually alleged by the nominalist, not of the nominalist.
December 31, 2024 at 22:23
No worries.
December 31, 2024 at 02:09
As I specified, here: So, is that the same as admitting that Pegasus is fiction, and doesn't literally exist? Or not?
December 31, 2024 at 02:03