bongo fury

Ok.

Haha, yes I was being a tad sweeping there, wasn't I. I still haven't been corrected on my neurons reference either...

I was only trying to explain that on previous occasions when you might have thought I was committing to mental entities, I wasn't. So... it does matte...

You need to explain it, too, I'm afraid. "Internal" thus far has meant intra-cranial. The film was composed of images on a screen several metres away....

No. Like you, I'm gifted with symbolic/referential skills, and hence afflicted with the temptation to believe I experience internal illusions and imag...

I suppose that is a plausible sci-fi scenario. I think a more realistic one would restrict "p-zombie" to creatures un-afflicted, or un-gifted, with th...

That may be, but is it faulty in the same way? Is something I said false for the same reason your statement (or the token of it you were then writing)...

It was a film about nerve firings. Mind and an inner film show, as actual non-fictional things. If the "it" here refers to the projections onto a scre...

I would have to disagree. I know of them thanks to sitting my actual self in an actual theatre and watching an actual film show. But I'm questioning b...

I wasn't. I only said the alleged film show and theatre and audience are all fictional. I don't see why actual fictions (such as the actual reporting ...

What is the nature of non-existent fictional characters in a work of fiction?

I guess my spoken and thought (sub-vocalised) words are evidence of brain events, but you wouldn't say they describe those events? So, no, I don't see...

I don't say we don't think. Unless you are saying zombies don't think?

But the nerve firings actually happen. Your inner film show doesn't. That's what I'm saying, anyway. Maybe there are "illusionists" who come close to ...

For my part, I thought they were included among your alleged "mental components"?

The picture in the head. It doesn't happen.

By saying that mental components are a fiction which we get into the habit of entertaining as a convenient aid to succesful cognition. "What was my pr...

It might be. I'll have a go. I'm looking at the back of my front door, conscious of my consciousness of the colours and patterns: edges, curves, corne...

The annoying thing, without which no threat of paradox, and everything were merely (in the current idiom) "a spectrum", is that clear enough examples ...

A chair, or not a chair? That was HG Wells' question: Running with the idea, Max Black imagined an even more ambitious project: Such is the now famili...

So the OP is... what's that phrase, inauthentic narrative?

Fascinating though it is to see various notions of information displayed in their varyingly mystical colours, I'm surprised no one has questioned the ...

:ok: I see that you then got (and seemed all too willing to get) sidetracked, into questions of definition, or fixity or primacy or essence.

:ok:

Oh, ok.

To be even fairer, scratch "give", too. Admittedly, how (if) relation-words like verbs refer is where things get tricky, and potentially mixed up in h...

To be fair, "example", "word", "used" and "referent" also want scratching, here. I take your point that examples abound.

There are of course plenty of examples in most sentences. That doesn't mean reference isn't the main game.

Ok.

Sounds like natural language :wink:

Usually that's a good way to construe it if you are going for a literal construal.

If you mean you are more interested in reference than Wittgensteinians think is cool, then hooray.

Sadly, they think that is a ridiculously narrow approach. I wish people would stop accepting this notion (usually justified with a nod towards PI) of ...

I've never read much of Harry's stuff (on the suspicion that more is less) but, for the second time this weekend, I do applaud him for going against t...

:ok: (Admittedly off-topic, except possibly as regards the question of internal (or external) words and pictures representing internal processes.)

No! Only whether the word-string "then we can get extensions for it" was a misprint of "then we can get infinite extensions for it"? A different readi...

Did "then we can get extensions from it" mean "then we can get infinite extensions from it"?

One thing at a time? To which, Ought that have clarified for the competent reader that @"Pneumenon" meant "then we can get infinite extensions from it...

But if we reflect that what a word refers to or is pointed at is never a matter of fact anyway, but is one rather of interpretation, theoretical parsi...

haha :ok:

... But no typos?

Just to be clear, are you both dropping (or taking as read) an "infinite"?

Sure, maths as fiction with a super-coherent plot. And with illustrations, too. Kind of, Alice in Wonderland.

Please tick one: Zero or negligible Non-negligible but doubtful Certain, or negligible degree of doubt

... in whatever the discourse. Charity and world-domineering ambition alike require translation between discourses, and agreement re ontological commi...

What, to explain, ? :chin:

Sure, and many people here in this thread have made the obvious but important point that... is a contestable premise. But also... Because then, is a g...

The surprising thing about a sorites puzzle, or indeed any discussion of vagueness, is you don't need any analog. Analog is sufficient but not necessa...

As part of a balanced regimen of expository etiquette, including regular glossing, defining of terms has been shown to visibly reduce misunderstanding...