bongo fury

That was my impression. Oh, you! About you equivocating between fact and fiction. I suppose that does sound like us.

No.

But if they want to point out that, literally and unequivocally, Pegasus and numbers don't exist, it's up to you to explain how this isn't equivocal.

"To be is to be the value of a variable" just means (it seems to me) "To avoid rabbit holes, do this: read 'there exists some x such that' as 'at leas...

Influenced by chapter IV of Nelson Goodman's Languages of Art, I go for unanimity and a ternary nature of truth. A bright room can be controversially ...

We know. But the point about predicating truth of future utterances now?

If utterances can have propositional content (whatever that means) then surely pictures can have pictorial content?

Indeed!

Where (on earth) do you find that Quine accepts that kind of mystical connection? In his supposing some future inscription to exemplify the word "true...

Surely Quine suggests we refer timelessly (non-modally) to the sentence inscribed or uttered in a future region of space-time? And we describe it (rig...

But are you denying that it's already true?

And if it does, then the world (or region) satisfies the sentence in question. If not, not.

Is it satisfaction-apt? That was my point.

Yes but, to be fair... satisfaction of "it's raining" is a property of the weather event, not a property of the sentence. :joke:

1. Is this a hoax? 2. Is it a real hoax, or a bot-generated one? 3. What or who is nihilsum.com?

Eh? Never mind.

Can you, or can't you? You're waffling. I'm talking about a common sense understanding of plagiarism as warned about in typical forum guidelines. You ...

Any competent and reflective practitioner of English will define plagiarism as something like: deliberate or negligent misattribution of authorship. A...

Should we have some guidelines on acceptable use of plagiarism on the forum? Oh, we already do?

(quote from Kimhi) I would assume it does, until something stops it. Just by recognising it as a sentence in a language, you allow it to assert itself...

I see your point. (But yes the quote is direct.) Ok, I'm not falling down it. Maybe I need a push? Yes, "P; if P then A; therefore A" says that P. (As...

Who dug this rabbit hole? Lewis Carroll, apparently. (My emphasis.) I'm not falling down it. Maybe I need a push? Yes, 'Peter is a Jew; if Peter is a ...

?

appended to = prepended by?

Can you possibly see how answering this (again) might be considered "feeding the trolls"?

Yes. Quine clearly says that the whole outside sentence is what refers to something other than itself, and he clearly doesn't say that the inside sent...

Oh dear. The cos and sin question was my attempt to help someone grok Quine's (perfectly standard) usage of "inside sentence" vs "outside sentence". N...

Are you really unable to find my answer to this question in my previous post? It would mean for it to instead be attributing falsity to a smaller sent...

I admitted to being unsure about the drift of that Quine passage, but you don't seem even to speak the language. I'm being rude, but your tone is to l...

No. Quine doesn't say that, and he doesn't say anyone else has said that.

To be fair, here's Quine: But... the inside sentence still so engenders? Because, indeed, So I'm not quite sure what kind of objection is being sustai...

Yes. Asserting irreflexivity of reference (in general, or in cases like "this sentence has... etc") seems as confused and cranky as asserting irreflex...

Barbers cannot shave themselves. I maintain that barbers are people who shave people who are in the world. If they must be shaved, the barbers must vi...

The "without" reading of A?B does need brackets when written: Not (A without B) i.e. ¬(A & ¬B) I think they are there implicitly in "not A without B" ...

Yes, the red and white system at least. Unfortunate that it shades in where I was shading out. But it shows how logic uses "not" as a reversal of shad...

If.

If doesn't follow from then it would seem that we don't intuit negation in this case as a photographic negative of the Venn diagram, which is what log...

Oops.

It's not rocket science. We use a word to mention a thing. We use a word in quote marks to mention the word.

I think people can (almost) be forgiven for misunderstanding use and mention in this way. "Mention" in ordinary usage (!) strongly fits with "by the w...

To be fair, so does ¬(A?B). Yes, because it means A without B. Isn't it intuitive that A without B entails A? And isn't it intuitive that A?B means no...

To be fair, if ¬(A?B) is true and A is false, anything is true. Because, if ¬(A?B) is true, A is true. Which isn't counter-intuitive, because it's int...

Wouldn't that suggest they are crisp, and a hierarchical tree by set inclusion? But you mean fuzzy and laterally overlapping? "Clouds" more appropriat...

Unless A is already a contradiction, e.g. defined as C ? ~C. Then, regardless of whether A is affirmed or denied, both (A entails B) and (A entails no...

Related... Do (A entails B) and (A entails notB) contradict each other?

I see.

You know, map vs replicated territory. This being a good example. Amazingly detailed descriptions/theoretical models of ancestors; or physical replica...

Only if semiotics implies phenomenology.

This corresponds to Scruton's sliding scale of degree of pornographic-ness, if I recall: the greater our interest in what is pictured and the less our...

Haha, not if @"Michael" can help it. And good for him. As he says, and I admitted in the first place, I may not be addressing the usual problem, and c...