Banno

Is there any physical basis for what constitutes a 'thing' or 'object'? Here is Wittgenstein rejecting the notion of a "simple" he had developed in hi...

Seems so. The world doesn't talk, people talk.

There's a lot in that, most notably the notion that a proposition is something apart from the utterances that instantiate it. Let's contrast two ideas...

Odd. I would count "I have a laptop" as a proposition in the first person, and "You have an internet connection" as a proposition in the second person...

Sure. Propositions as proposals as to how things are. Did I say something contrary to that? Ordinarily, And yes, their illocutionary force is to say h...

I don't, but you might. Perhaps one advantage of so doing is that it displays how integral language is to our interactions with the world. Again, that...

One cannot move something with one's hand without using one's hand. But one can certainly - and indeed usually does - use one's hand without directing...

Thank you. That thank you has been sitting in drafts for six months. My apologies for not posting it earlier. My apologies also for involving you in w...

There is a difference between using one's hand to touch or move something, and being aware that it is one's hand one is using to touch or move somethi...

Aware? There is some unpacking to do here. They use their hand, perhaps; but is that all there is to being aware of one's hands? The game takes place ...

If there is a third Wittgenstein, it is the one Kripke invented. I'd suggest that the social aspect of rule following provides the answer to Kripke's ...

Postulating a "hand as it is in-itself" gets nowhere. Such a hand cannot enter into our discussions, cannot be used to pick things up, and "drops out ...

A few points. Foremost, OC is not a coherent argument for a specific point of view. It would be an error then to attempt to interpret it in a way that...

This is a trolley: https://www.verdex.com.au/assets/full/V1190.jpg?20230811115216 This is a tram: https://makemeiconic.com/cdn/shop/products/australia...

A valiant attempt. But the "tram problem" is lost - not even a mention of Philippa Foot. I can't help but suppose the over simplification occurred as ...

External locus of control.

The OP seems pointless.

Thanks for that. Bathtubs? Best laugh today.

Interesting. The Gestalt approach might provide a way of understanding Kripke's skeptical argument. Kripke has us being unable to account for why addi...

Yep. Reaching aporia, methodologically, can be an indication that the picture one has been exploring is unclear, confused... nonsense? I prefer toothp...

Nice. We might look to differences as well as similarities. One difference is that Wittgenstein's writing leads less to aporia than to a change in ges...

https://www.etymonline.com/word/concern#etymonline_v_46683

You'd know. I'll leave you to it then. Edit: "vis-a-vis" and "regarding" are not so dissimilar. Nor does anything in what I have said reference Anselm...

Does any one else see this as a bad argument? @"Count Timothy von Icarus"? @"Srap Tasmaner"? If logic does not have ontological implications, then the...

Well, yes. First order predicate calculus does not render ontological conclusions. Be charitable here. :grin: Seems we are getting to the real point o...

Well said. Consider; Would it be more charitable to keep or remove the inconsistencies? On the account you gave, it would be best to remove the incons...

I'm not quite against conceptual relativism. You might recall my fascination with Midgley, who emphasises the difference between various conversations...

Reading the last few posts, I wonder what folk think the Principle of Charity is.

Both make use of the very same rule for quantifier introduction. D says that this is a table; P says that this is not a table. D can introduce a quant...

There is no definition in the quote you cite.

No, it doesn't. An adequate explanation of "what quantifier variance is" would show the difference between at least two forms of quantifier. The quote...

After thinking on it, it seems not to be a possibility. Indeed, since Universal Generalisation is taken as granted in first order logic. The formalisa...

That quote does not set out what quantifier variance is. It merely stipulates that DKL - David Lewis - and PKV - Peter van Inwagen - mean different th...

Yeah, I like it, it's a bit divergent, but on topic. "Any particular man is mortal" introduces a quantifier almost obliquely. In first order logic it ...

Cool. Took me a while to catch on. My apologies. So This is pretty clear: How Universal Generalization Works According To Natural Reason Salient is th...

So you haven't been reading my posts. Fine. and logic... :wink:

Has he? Ok. So what are these "intensional differences in quantifiers"? How are you using "intensional" here? How does that play out? How do introduct...

Well, that's what I'm asking, by way of answering this: I'm still wanting an example of where quantifier variation is not also domain variation. I don...

Hang on. (Pa?Qa) ? (?x (Px ? Qx) is not valid. How does "if you made no assumptions about a anywhere in your reasoning" change this? And P( a )? ?xP( ...

I'm not sure I follow what you are suggesting here. Yes, sometimes folk make invalid inference, or fail make valid inference. But in order to recognis...

Can you set out why or how the analogy does not work? In what salient way is logic not a game of stipulation? Why doesn't it matter how you quantify o...

I'll add that the above seems to me to be much the same point as that made here:

I was thinking something not too dissimilar; that there is an approach to doing philosophy that looks only at the large scale, using a big brush, and ...

I'd be surprised if there were a substantive difference. We should explore whether the "three main flavours" are properly independent. To my eye the t...

Can we list them? We have the is of predication: the cat is black; the is of quantification: there is a black cat; and the is of equality: The cat nam...

Why do Bishops move diagonally? This bit of history only partially answers the question. It remains that we might move bishops anywhere we like on the...

I agree with much of this post. One can't count things unless there are things to count. But it cannot follow that there being things logically preced...

There is an x such that x drank the last beer. There is an x such that x left these footprints. There is an x such that x is heavy and x is in the box...

What's my point? Is there a substantive disagreement here? If so, what is it? (Edit: I posted that previous comment before finishing it, then lost the...