Banno

But are all regresses in time?

Do you see that you have changed your topic? Now you are not claiming that there can be no infinite regresses, but that there can be no infinite causa...

Yes I can. I can number them in any order I like. That's one of the funny things about numbers. When you count a bunch of things, you get the same num...

So you believe. (See what I did there?)

But that's a finite regress... And even so, I could number the events backwards: 1. Black goes in hole 2. White hits black 3...

Why? I sat through 2018. I know what it is. I can give it a number. And then I can number every year before that.

why?

Start at 2018. We know what that is. Then work backwards. Define 2017 as the year before 2018. And 2016 as the year before 2017. A neat recursive defi...

Notice that this is an additional assumption. It doesn not follow from

Try writing it {2018, 2017, 2016...}

...and then I would say "what the fuck does than mean..."

It starts at 2018.

Of course it has a start. You can start it anywhere - just as you can count to infinity from any integer.

Could we all agree at least on this?

Try this. A finite regress will have a finite number of items. An infinite regress will not. None of which says anything about the "existence" of infi...

So why pretend to this long version, when the real version is "Every regress is countable, therefore there cannot be an infinite regress". Is it becau...

All you are saying here is that a finite regress is not an infinite regress. Yep. You are right.

While the number of events in a regress may be an integer, the number of events in an infinite regress is, by that very fact, infinite. And infinity i...

The number of events in an infinite regress is... infinite. Infinity is not an integer.

Infinity is greater than any integer.

Which statement?

The number of events in an infinite regress is greater than any integer. The rest of your argument fails from there.

I'm not in the mood to work through all the stuff done over the last few days. I was going to address replies specific to me. Is there anything specif...

You tell me. I wasn't watching. I as going to try to reply to your last to me. But it begins to look like that might be the wrong approach. My path wo...

SO what now? I gather there has been some male fragility going on while I was meditating.

Poached Chicken, avocado mash, aioli, assorted greens, between multigrain. The end result is the realisation that nothing can be said about the stuff ...

Some few of us chose to remain behind, to help the flies out of the bottle... And it gives me something to chew on while I watch the telly. (...maybe ...

...

That was a joke. But apparently not

The problem here is of course simply that you have not accepted Wittgenstein's explanation.

Naming and Necessity is an extended argument against the theory that a name refers in virtue of an associated description. I think the argument is suc...

That the process leads to muddles. Keep it simple. There's more, but it's about Wittgenstein and stuff, so...

Sure. Your conclusion was shown to be wrong by Cantor. But hey, that never stops you.

An infinite sequence need not contain every possible permutation. So "101010101010101..." need never contain "...111...".

Well, not quite. Rather he shows that reference is independent of description. That's what the book is about.

So since the OP here is mine, perhaps we might proceed by your putting into your own terms what you think I have claimed in the OP? Perhaps it will he...

I've been reading and writing philosophy for quite a while. Show me something new, and I will be grateful. For now, you look to be yet another idealis...

Thanks. So presumably a subjective entity is one that has subjective experiences - feelings and such. What are the objective things to which we report...

OK. I still do not understand what you said.

This harks nicely back to the early discussion with @"Isaac" regarding direction of fit. But again, this is not a thread about such things. The best y...

Is saying @"frank" exists independently of us when we do not read his threads no more than a belief? Poor Frank.

@"frank", @"TheWillowOfDarkness" - is this waffle for you? It is for me. Another example of language gone astray. "The subject" - the individual? Merk...

So many issues squeezed into such a small space. I don't plan to answer this here. realism-idealism debates are fun, and we can have one if you like. ...

How could you ever know that you agree, as opposed to appearing to agree...? After all, all you have is your perceptions of agreement... (and so on......

Indeed.

And the meta-point, the one this thread is about, is how this has so misled Leo.

Leo, and all, take a look at how this uses "we". Perceptions are only ever in one person's mind, and yet we construct the world. Some might recall a d...

And I'd be meaner still. @"Leo" concludes that the tree disappears when unobserved despite there being no evidence to support this.

So would you be incline to agree with Leo?