Banno

How far?

Then you reject the limitations imposed by our shared reality? Can someone be mistaken in your view? Even wrong?

is that Michael's insistence on the mooted "apple-as-present", the view that there are two things here, the apple and the apple-as-presented? That ins...

N-gram

It might be clearer to talk of properties about which we agree. Extensionally, what counts is that agreement - that you and I and Michael all agree th...

Perhaps the difficulty is to do with how a model-theoretical account relaters to intuitionist mathematics. On the on hand we have a clear idea of trut...

We did this already. https://survey2020.philpeople.org/survey/results/5030?aos=47 That's the data from philosophers of mathematics. 43 respondents. St...

Sounds accurate. If the observer is aware of the delay, then they are aware that they see the apple as is was ten seconds previously. They are under n...

So metaphysician undercover is now saying numbers are not ordinal, only cardinal. While Frank continues to say very little.

Oh, so the observer is unaware of the ten-second delay? Then that's the problem. The causal and epistemic stories differ.

:meh:

The pain and c- fibres firing stuff needs a detailed look. Pain has a different grammar to colour, despite what Michael seems to suppose. So it's temp...

For a start, Kripke's causal theory of reference plays against indirect realism in much the same way it plays against descriptivist theories of refere...

yes indeed. Existential qualification functions within a domain. So if it’s univocal then it’s univocal only within that domain... So we might think t...

:meh:

What are your thoughts?

:meh:

I'd reject the term "mental image of an apple". It's already floating free of application, already private. I do occasionally see apples. When I do so...

So the point becomes one of pedagogy - how to have Michael or Amadeus understand their mistake. But his involves a change away from thinking of privat...

You've claimed I don't, but haven't set out anything to support such a view. I have asked. What, for you , is realism? Technically, it's the commitmen...

Whatever it take for you to commit.

Nice. To my eye the mistake is to treat "phenomenal character" as an item, to quantify were quantification is illicit. To suppose that there exists a ...

An admirable approach.

, I hope you haven't conceded this - that we never see apples, or taste oysters, or hear birdsong.

Following Quine, There is exactly one whole number between one and three. Therefore, our theory quantifies over at least one whole number. Hence, we a...

What do you take Quine to have said about ontological commitment with regard to mathematical entities? It'd be helpful to understand how you think it ...

I've no clear idea of what you are getting at here.

ok.

This? Tell me what you think realism is - how you are here using it... Ontological realism (Platonism), Semantic realism, Quantificational or somethin...

Do you? Well then, tell me. Say something. Commit.

@"frank" Compare your interpretation of quus. There are multiple ways for us to continue the sequence 3.1415926... but only one is ?. This is were Kri...

Here:

Where? “The decimal expansion of ? is not a completed object. It is an instruction for producing digits.” RFM I §32 “It is not as if all the digits we...

:brow: Platonism is not just "numbers exist", as Meta supposes. Why are you changing the topic back away from indispensability...?

I'm familiar with the article. What I am not sure of is how you see it as problematic for the account I gave. Just to be clear, the indispensability a...

And this somehow shows my proposal is problematic? If you were willing to set this out as an argument, rather than just wave at it, we might have an i...

The straw man to which I referred is the one proffered as the only alternative to indirect realism, is the contentious "direct realism" of their imagi...

So can you show, or even suggest, a problem with it? Something more than mere disparagement ?

Mathematical platonism is the view that mathematical stuff, numbers and triangles and so on, exist independently of human minds, language, and thought...

Stay cryptic. It's your only defence.

Which system? What contradiction?

The shark was dead.

Better, education is learning to use the rules. And the issue is, what can we do with the rules. Opening up, instead of closing off.

Everyone here uses that excuse.

...as bait? Maybe. Oily, so it'll attract something...

You always are fishing. It's what you do. What I so rudely call "failure to commit".

Well, yes - conceptual clarification. It's the elimination of the muddle of "first-person phenomenal experience", a philosophical fiction, bringing wi...

No, I'll leave the baiting to you.

That's were you live.

Well, finitism doesn't automatically reject set theory. Arguing in terms of 'isms' will not get us as far as setting out the detail. some might see ZF...