Banno

It's a belief if one thinks that it's so. It's faith if one believes it is so despite the evidence. But this is about method rather than belief. What ...

How rude! :razz:

Not faith so much as care and attention. Have you some alternative? :wink:

It certainly won't, if all can do is repeat his assertion that "hot refers to the sensation". John and Jane's disagreement is not a fiction; perhaps t...

Well, he was, from what we know, arguing that motion was not real. Paradoxes occur when we say things incorrectly. The world cannot be wrong, but what...

Here you are not presenting an argument, but blandly restating your opinion. That's not a proof af anything. The bottom line is that John and Jane are...

And that would be bad? End of the thread, I suppose.

So now, in order to maintain your account, you must say their difference is a fiction? you deny that John is hot and Jane is cold? But disagreement ex...

So the paradox involves confusing a way of talking, the maths, with a description of how things are, the ontology. We can be pretty confident that spa...

Yes, and the question is, is your use of "cold" only about some mental image, or about the water? The disagreement only makes sense if we are talking ...

Yep. Saying “the bath is hot” is world-directed. The word “hot” functions as a normative, public concept. What each person feels merely mediates acces...

See how explicit the admixture of two differing language games is here? What we have are ways of talking, language games, a grammar, or a paradigm - w...

Read that again, carefully. Yes, one person feels hot, the other cold. Yes, that experience is caused by the bath. But the example does not support th...

It doesn't solve, it dissolves. The paradoxes only appear to work because they slide between the mathematical and ontological games. Pick one, and set...

The trivial truth you trading on is that different viewers of the dress have different visual experiences, that Visual experience plays a causal role ...

That's irrelevant. The question is not whether experiences are private. The question is whether the meaning and reference of colour words is fixed by ...

You simply keep repeating this same error. No, they do not refer to "phenomenal qualities", because such "qualities" are never just "phenomena", they ...

I'm not claiming calculus tells us what space and time are; I'm denying that this is a coherent question.

Wittgenstein would say it worked, so, so what?

:grin: I just did. Did you? Which paradox would you like explained? Maybe tomorrow.

And some can’t do the maths.

It's not well enough known, to summaries? see . No need to overcomplicate things.

Yep. \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{4} + \frac{1}{8} + \cdots is \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^n} that is, 1. there are an infinite number of steps in this d...

:wink: My apologies for my curtness. I'v'e in mind heading off a divergence into discussions of rules.

So we picture {2, 4, 6...} and carry on in this way. But we know that there are innumerable ways to continue this sequence. The mapping is not based o...

That' doesn't cut it. You continue to suppose that colour terms fundamentally refer to phenomenal qualities, while I and others maintain they are part...

Cheers. Half the problem here is that those who are advocating indirect realism think the only alternative is a naive direct realism. That, and mistak...

Not quite. I don't use "mind independent", it's a term of philosophical art, not at all useful "Bird" refers to the bird. Red is the colour of its hea...

but

An addition: The Cantor–Schröder–Bernstein theorem states: If there exists an injection f:A?B and an injection g:B?A, then there exists a bijection h:...

No, we don't. Encoding Turing machines only enumerates decidable subsets of N, not all of P(N).

P(N) and Dec(N) are different sets. Pdec(N) is an odd notation; I presume you mean it as the decidable subsets of P(N). I'll use Dec(N) there, to avoi...

Perhaps you read Kripke more closely than you read Wittgenstein. I think we agreed here: But please, start another thread if you like.

Well, not quite. Skepticism of this sort hinges on the opening paragraph of §201:This was our paradox: no course of action could be determined by a ru...

Second that and add §201. @"Frank" has apparently accepted Kripke's rule-skepticism, but also notes that it's the doing, the "carry on in this way..."...

Amen.

Nor is an ad hominem.

Yep, this in keeping with the mention of Markov Blankets and also fitting in with Mary Midgley. Works for me. I'd add that it is true that the ship is...

That's a non sequitur. The USA elected him, twice. That does not meant they are all in agreement with him. It does means they are fucked.

So the real reason for invading Greenland is that "Your country" didn't give him the Nobel Peace Prize. The USA is fucked.

Anecdote is not argument.

Cheers. Your discussion with Michael mirrors my previous discussions with him. We understand the item you used to be a galleon, a painting, a collecti...

, Given Meta's rejection of quantification, and now of numbers being ordered, it's about as clear as it could be that for Meta there is very little le...

Again, there seems to me to be a bunch of errors in what you have said here. The core one seems to be equating P(N) with the decidable sets. The state...

Sure. But in addition to the usual thngs nominalism rejects, Meta rejects the notion that numbers as values of variables. while nominalists say number...

Ok. Here's some stuff that won't work if we accept Meta's ideas. Quantification If numbers are not admissible as values of bound variables, then state...

Yes, indeed he is. And the counterpoint is that "being a thing", especially in mathematics, consists in being the value of a bound variable. As in "fo...

So your argument is that 2 is not between 1 and three. Righto. Well, no. You claimed there is a contradiction, repeatedly, but never showed what it wa...

Yep.

We can make it simpler for you: How many whole numbers are there between one and three? I say one. You say, they can't be counted. Then show us that o...