Srap Tasmaner

At Titus Andronicus shows, Patrick Stickles makes this little speech about how not everyone has fun the same way, and asks the crowd to be aware of pe...

An excellent response! I'm okay with distinguishing whether a sentence is true from whether someone happens to know it. Guesses can be right, sure. Th...

Fair enough. I'd still say that informally talking about a part may often count as also talking about the whole, that this deduction is in fact made, ...

Are you sure about all that? I could see wanting to get clearer about the logical form of saying "partly ..." but I'd expect some variation there. If ...

Thanks for replying. I'm always interested in your posts. Let's say that gold has whatever properties it has, whether we know it or not, whether we co...

Sorry, I wasn't placing us before Season 3. I meant roughly as we have things in the real world, with 5 books and however many seasons of the tv show....

@"Michael" Here's a variation on your simulation: Suppose the tv series "Game of Thrones" followed the book series exactly in Season 1, but began to d...

In the scenario you described, people would make no use of gold's melting point in teaching others how to use the word "gold", and by hypothesis could...

This.

Agreed. It's also not clear to me that either Wittgenstein or Dummett held such a position, if that matters.

That sounds like Hegel -- we were talking about logic. <ducks>

Alright I'm confused. The meaning of a word is determined by its use. What use? Its use in sentences. What sentences? The answer to that cannot be jus...

I think it has to be "could play" rather than "play" there: what's being rejected is any role for something in principle inaccessible.

The "strong" and "weak" thing works for me.

I looked up the reference in The Logical Basis of Metaphysics, which I've not yet read, and you're on the right track here. (He does a thing, like you...

(I'll continue to speak for Dummett as best I can ...) You can also look at this as an inference rule, or an introduction rule: it says that ?P ? ¬P? ...

Wow. This is incredibly helpful.Many many thanks. Agreed. Actually, what I thought most likely was that the zone between the red marks is where an ind...

Yeah, I know. I should have said, Dummett upholds what he calls "tertium non datur". Anyway, it's a different principle.

Can you give an example? The only intuitionist I've read much is Dummett, who rejects both: he takes the principle of bivalence as the semantic correl...

Sorry, I didn't mean to give the impression I was disagreeing with you. I feel like there's more to say on this topic, but I don't like anything I wro...

I want to take one more shot at this. The human custom of swimming for recreation is a pattern of human behaviour; but swimming requires something to ...

You know how we know induction works? It's always worked before. You should also check out Goodman's new riddle of induction. Also Carl Hempel's raven...

Here, have another.

Just go watch it and let's stop padding Banno's reply count.

Wait, seriously, you haven't seen High Fidelity?

Hume divides arguments into two types: deductive and inductive. Deductive he disposes of directly by claiming that "The past is not a guide to the fut...

On the other not-this-topic, there's always SophistiCat's filter. (I miss the old days of newsreaders and killfiles.)

I thought I was going to really hate that when the harmonica entered, but there's something pleasantly middle-aged about this. I could still do withou...

I don't read the entire forum so I didn't know what I know now. Aw hell, I'll let it stand. We could pretend it's a brand new day. In the face of reca...

Positive reinforcement?

I think the answer to both is abstraction, and that language and mathematics both excel at this.

Thank you both for your civility.

I'm largely going to be defending myself here, but don't take that as meaning I don't I appreciate your critique! So there are two main points: I have...

That's pretty much it. Hume's argument isn't that complicated. How much simpler were you hoping to make it?

I think this does make sense as a model of partial belief, for at least some cases, but I'm still not sure why. One approach might be to follow @"apok...

And the model for this, what Goodman called "entrenchment", is over here.

This whole paragraph is essentially stuff you already said, @"StreetlightX", but you were presenting a more or less happy version (spiffy new concepts...

No, I didn't think you'd agree with that. I went that way because regardless of the speaker's motivation, this is, in part, what it would amount to in...

I agree with a lot of this, and the way it works over time, as a model of our process of discovery, is compelling. But grains of sand are interchangea...

Hovering over this thread, especially as it relates to language, is the standard indirect realist view that everything is a construction, if not socia...

One other thought on bosses and ladders: his ordering me up is in itself interesting. Giving a command based on a belief -- we can suppose he honestly...

Ah, sorry, by "authority" I didn't mean someone in a position to order me to climb, but someone I considered an expert, whose opinion I trusted. I get...

It does look that way.

Not exactly, and thanks for this clarification: And big thanks for telling me what this is! I just made this up. I didn't know this is called a "logis...

Stumbled across this today while working nearby: Holy crap. My little Excel "simulations" weren't quite this scary.

Apologies -- I thought your post was another from @"WISDOMfromPO-MO". Anyway, your description is appealing. (Btw, I hope it's obvious to you why I'm ...

True, but the marginal increase in the percentage of the puzzle finished does get smaller. Forgot about that.

I don't think so. I think this model is purely internal, whereas my dim memory of Kuhn was that he's looking at external factors too. I would guess th...