Banno

Too big a jump - no, it's a conventional view of naming that has little to do with the substance of the ship. Same point. For your argument to work yo...

Let me think on it. Seems that you think realism must deny any form of convention, which isn't right. Tomorrow.

Repeating an assertion is not an argument.

Hm.. Let's check our usage. I said this concerning @"Michael"'s apparent claim: So paraconsistent logic denies explosion. Dialetheism, quite distinctl...

I'm having difficulty following the issue... IS it that (2) already seems to evaluate "the cat is on the mat"?

I agree with the summary. But this: I don't think that quite right - rather it accepts that the height is neither known nor unknown; and hence paracon...

My apologies. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fitch-paradox/ ah - @"EricH" beat me to it.

OK, I'm interested. the Fitch article in SEP sets out how antirealism can survive if it relies on paraconsitent logic. that was part of what motivated...

Yeah, the view that A and ~A can be true at the same time. Thinking A neither true nor false would be paraconsistent. But Michael would have it that A...

Yep, you are. But you are making a conclusion about realism from that. What is your argument for that conclusion? Trying to cut to the arguments here;...

...and so back to

Yes, I would have thought so. Hence my question - is any precedence for the view that one sentence can have two truth values?

Yep. Worth mentioning.

That's specifically the issue - does it count as one ship or two? And "count as..." is a lexical marker for issues of convention. ...seems you agree.....

Cheers.

Thinking on @"Michael"'s notion that a statement can have two truth values. it's not paraconsistent logic - which holds that A, ~A ? B is not a valid ...

What, specifically, is the difference between these?

The import here is that of a word game, perhaps; the reason for this thread is to explore the relation between several recent topics, including logica...

Cheers. The mathematical notion of truth you provided gives us a clear picture of anti-realism. And you mention the rejection of the notion that all t...

I don't see why. There's this: Nothing in there about the objective-subjective divide. A realist can agree that the ship's components have changed and...

I mentioned Davidson, and T-sentences. The notion of interpretation I am using might have been clear from that. "S" is tru iff T T is an interpretatio...

I can't speak for Michael, but the plane is interesting. Suppose you had a claim to the ship before it left port - when the plane returns, do you stil...

I've just had a large lunch. Some digestion is needed.

If the "he" is Davidson or I, I don't think so.

I read your comment in situ but did not reply. It put me in mind of Pliny the Younger's house - I'd just been reading his Letters. I was stuck by the ...

Cheers. The fact that it's a book and not an article is... intimidating. But there's something in the idea that is worth a bit of effort.

Interesting. But I have to go fix a chook shed that is falling apart ofter recent rain, and already have a pretty full reading list. Would you care to...

Cheers. My suspicion is that there would be little disagreement between us here.

Re-read that with care. Have a little think about it.

This is perplexing, since I have the greatest respect for your understanding of the topic. I do not deny that we have experiences. But I think the dis...

Back to ad homs already. Your thesis is that interpretation implies something uninterpreted. My contention is that everything is already interpreted. ...

Ah, I see - a view expounded, not defended. My error.

Then show me the supporting documentation.

Nuh. A realist is at liberty to use reference in any way they see fit. It's clear that the ship can be treated as the same, or as different, and that ...

There's your mistake. T-sentences again, of course. But I might not go over that again here.

Yep. Thanks for clarifying. The division between noumenal and phenomenal implies an uninterpreted world. There isn't an uninterpreted world. Or if you...

Nope. Everything is always interpreted. The question has been answered.

Again, this does not seem to follow. It's as much dependent on what happens to that stuff as what we say about it. Which is the main point I'm making ...

These are the very same question, expressed differently. That's a rather important lesson that came from linguistic philosophy. It needs to be underst...

Is that so? The ship leaves port. The mast is replaced, then the keel; the various planks of the hull are replaced. At each step something is taken an...

I don't see how that follows.

A conclusion, rather than an accusation. What you haven't done is provided an account of truth; rather you are advocating a change in the way we use t...

A what now?

As an end in itself.

What an extraordinary reply!

Or if you choose to play a different game, do it explicitly. Cheers.

Agreeing on a use for our terms is the very stuff of philosophy. Beginning with definitions is expecting to start at the finish.

I don't disagree, but woudl point out that language transcends language. Poetry is of course just more language; and there is no definite distinction ...

Para-consistent logic An alternate solution is to adopt a trinary logic. For mathematics, we might borrow from Kripke, and suppose that there are thre...

I was being nice.