Luke

This may be true of physical instantiations but why must it also be true of abstract ideas? This does not follow. Your implicit assumption here is tha...

This conflates the idea with its instantiation: the idea of the chair and the chair. You are again trying to attribute to me the view that the "instan...

I’ve already demonstrated this to be a straw man argument: the “thought event” (i.e coming up with the idea) is not identical with the idea it produce...

Who's calling them "two different ideas"? I've asked you repeatedly why it's absurd or impossible for two people to create/invent the same idea indepe...

How does your algorithm give us the Mona Lisa? Or a toaster? Obviously if you assume that ideas have some type of pre-existence then their discovery m...

How is it absurd? Yes, I said that in my post. Didn't you say this was absurd? I already went over this in my previous post. You are conflating the "t...

I noticed that I posted two different responses to your previous post. I thought I'd lost the first one to the ether and then tried to recreate it fro...

Yes, I understand, but you’ve simply repeated your stipulation that two people cannot invent the same idea (content) just because they are different p...

So you say, but do you have any argument to support this assertion of pre-existence? Why can’t two people invent the same idea independently without t...

It seems to me that he’s not arguing against invention-only, but rather he is arguing for discovery-only. The conflation of possibilities and ideas co...

What does it do? Anyway, I doubt I’ll get to see it spit out every possibility within my lifetime.

I don't see the issue. I've never denied that ideas are about something, or that they have content. In the example of two people coming up with the sa...

They each came up with the same idea independently. Isn’t that what you’ve told us? What other ground do you need? I didn’t imply that it couldn’t be ...

In response to all of your quotes: Possibilities are not equivalent to ideas. I don't deny that such things are possible.

"We"? "at length"? I must have missed it. Can you quote where this was "shown at length"?

What about fictional concepts/characters? Surely they are invented and not discovered? I find it odd to speak of the "invention" or "discovery" of abs...

It's not relevant only if you assume the pre-existence of ideas. As I said in my first post to this discussion, "discovery" implies (or connotes) the ...

The "concrete having of an idea by a person" is not relevant to whether ideas are discovered or invented? Or you're not interested in this question de...

I think you are contesting it. You're effectively saying that ideas can only be discovered and cannot be invented, because ideas are possibilities, an...

Unless someone "takes" the photograph - which is the analog of "coming up with" the idea - then no ideas/photographs can exist.

And I'm saying that may be true only if you conflate ideas with possibilities.

You seem to be conflating possibilities and ideas. You say that there exists an infinite set of possibilities and that an idea is a possibility (or a ...

"Discovery" implies that every idea already exists, just waiting to be found. Whereas "invention" implies that an idea did not previously exist. I'm a...

Wittgenstein agrees that this contradiction is the source of the paradox; he just finds this explanation to be not comprehensive enough. The point I'v...

Okay, but your futuristic examples are not what Wittgenstein meant by his example. I'm trying to explain what he meant with his example.

You responded prior to my edit. I meant that they are both used to mean the same thing, usually.

Okay then, I'm not interested in a debate over direct/indirect realism. Couldn't exactly the same thing be said regarding your assumption of indirect ...

Beg which question? I'm just trying to make sense of Moore's paradox by way of McGinn's article. I tried to answer the question you raised about her a...

It's an interesting observation. As I understand it, Wittgenstein's aim is to undermine the assumption that 'I believe...' is a description of a menta...

You did make this claim, in your now deleted post: You state above: ""I believe" can be a description of one's mental state". This is what I have been...

But it's not the belief itself which is "a description of one's mental state" in that case; it's the doubt about the belief.

With regard to the "description of one's mental state" that you mentioned earlier, it sounds like this description concerns the level of certainty/dou...

I don't follow how the above statement is about one's own mental state but "I believe that some philosophical positions are better than others" is not...

Could you say more about how either statement is a description of one's mental state?

Why is one of these a description of one's mental state but the other is not?

I would guess that 'It is raining' is about the weather, whereas 'I believe it is raining' is about one's belief. The belief may be implied by the for...

What’s a good pick? That you like her or that she will help to defeat Trump?

Marie Mcginn's article (PDF) is worth a read. She offers this account of Moore's paradox and his solution: This is pretty much what many people here, ...

But that just perpetuates the claim with which Wittgenstein expressly disagrees: that the paradox is "an absurdity for psychological reasons".

You appear to suggest that Moore, Wittgenstein and Ramsey were in agreement on this. However, according to Marie McGinn, Wittgenstein did not agree wi...

I don’t think this is right (even though I conceded to @"Michael" earlier that it was). I find the sentence to be absurd whether the speaker is lying ...

That's probably because you tried to argue that the word "value" has only one meaning, then I provided several other different dictionary definitions,...

These are the same meaning of the word "animal", with a definition such as: "a living organism that feeds on organic matter, typically having speciali...

This implies the same meaning of the word "value" across all "types of values". The dictionary for one thing. My knowledge of different meanings/uses ...

What basis is there for assuming that the word "value" can have only one meaning?

It's as though I am talking about the bank of a river and you keep telling me that I must be talking about a financial institution. What is ""value" i...

For god sake, man. There is a meaning of the word "value" which is a synonym for "number". I'm not talking about a type of value, as in the values tha...

What does any of that have to do with numbers? I assume you saw the phrase "mathematical object" in the Wikipedia article on value and now you want to...

They are different meanings of the word "value", as demonstrated by the Wikipedia article I posted. If you can't accept this, then I wish you well.