Banno

Neither of my rings would be accurately described as yellow.

But of course we wouldn't want to just be adding auxiliary hypotheses in order to protect our pet theory.

The difference is profound, while subtle. SO one says that gold has an atomic mass of 79, and hence if some sample has another atomic mass, it is not ...

@"Hanover", I think we ought take transworld identity as read for the purposes of this thread. I'm quite comfortable with Kripke's account, in Naming ...

Give me an example...:razz: Whereof we cannot speak, and so on. How does this part of the discussion relate back to Kant and Kripke?

An interesting approach. I like it. Only, I'm going to follow Davidson and say that incommensurability is not an option. If two groups of ideas don't ...

About that. i've no clear idea of what you are saying.

It's too hot to go outside - well over 40ºC. I'd send you some sun if I could.

Frank, I'm teasing the distinction Hume introduced to see if it can stand on it's own feet. Looks to me like it can't. (See me avoid the can't/Kant jo...

This is where we came in. Hm. I cannot imagine the square root of -1. But I can bring the words together and then manipulate them to produce say a cur...

AH. Good question. You had best explain the difference, if we are going to proceed.

I agree, but we need to keep one eye on the difference between essence for Kant and for Kripke. As I understand Kant, the essential predicates are tho...

Water composed of helium and oxygen.

One can imagine all sorts of things that are impossible.

Ah. Said I was slow. That's not an issue: I want my cornflakes not as they are in the pack, but slightly soggy from cold milk. I want my I want my bea...

TPF?

So set it out for me. I'm a slow old man.

Perhaps I see see beyond your deeper point... let's debar the Humpty Dumpty world where words mean whatever we choose. Then if we find a red substance...

no - hence my specification of atomic mass.

Relevance?

2+1=3 in all possible worlds. If it did not, we would not be talking about 2,3,+, or =. Water is H?O in all possible worlds. If it were not, we would ...

Possible worlds. The best way to understand them is by seeing how they are used in possible world semantics. It's simply a way to parse any modal stat...

I don't see that you can escape modality quite so easily. Suppose a mine starts digging out red gold. Same mailability, same atomic mass, same melting...

You like the word really - what is really going on; what the statement really tells us. I'm not so keen. I still do not see how your post explains any...

I've no idea how this helps.

indeed; and if they are married, they are not bachelors; and if they are not married, they are. It's not a case of one without the other.

That just looks like an invalid marriage to me. I don't see a philosophical issue here, just a legal one.

Fair enough.

Kant: The law of contradiction holds in PWS. In no world can there be a contradiction. But there can be differences between worlds; so while my cat is...

I like the entry Possible Worlds and Modal Logic in SEP. It sets out how possible world semantics (PWS) solves the issue of substitution for modal log...

Interesting thread, @"tim wood". The question for me is, if ? is a priory, is ? also necessary? Kripke takes Kant as saying this.

§71. The "stand roughly there" bit. Brilliant.

Yeah, well. I think you crazy. But persistent. And occasionally interesting. But mostly frustrating. Basically, an arse pain.

Understood. @"Pelle", there seems to be an issue with the notion that because the body changes, the self changes. Why should we think that? If you lik...

Who's cells are being replaced? @"Pelle"'s. Does having your cells replaced somehow make you not Pelle? As if the stuff you are made of is essential t...

...or thinking that there is something that counts as a real individual... as opposed to how we use terms for individuals.

Somewhere he says something like "don't look to the meaning, look to the use!" I sometimes read this as providing a philosophical out from those torri...

Sam is right. Instead of examining meaning, examine use.

A better question might be why it came back again.

Are you suggesting that Kant and Kripke are incommensurable? That's a long stretch.

Here's something new - two sorts of necessity: logical and existential. But if being necessary is being true in all possible worlds, then they are muc...

So, Tim: if some thing is true a priori, is it also necessary? And what do you make of the case, in the Kripke text I quoted above, in which we ponder...

And yet, And it is this necessity in which I am interested. So, is being a priori the very same thing as being necessary? Or is it rather that all a p...

Well, I will agree at least that it's what counts as pain that is the key here. A fair point.

Maybe. For my part, roughly... Synthetic Vs. analytic: it's synthetic if it brings two distinct ideas together; it's analytic if one idea is contained...

Fine. Kant said: But Tim said: I find this hard to reconcile.

Gold is a yellow metal. That's not an analytic expression. Nor is it a priori. Given a suitable arrangement of lights, one could make gold appear purp...

Ah. You see, Tim, at my school we were taught that a priori and a posteriori were about how we found things out. a priori stuff was found out by consi...

I think you are missing something extraordinary. Not just validity, but proof, is dependent on logic. Logic is the structure of validity and proof. Ev...

It fails because it can also explain A-time? Odd.