apokrisis

Not really. Although ternary logic is something like it in fleshing out the strict counterfactuality of 0/1 binary code by introducing a middle ground...

Yep. So that does conflict with some of Peirce's apparent definition of 1ns as brute quality (with its implications of already being concrete or subst...

The word plus the vagueness it could organise. So the ancient Greeks got it. The peras and aperas of the Pythagoreans. The logos and flux of Heraclitu...

PoMo is full of shit because it is based on Saussurean semiotics rather than Peircean. So it is dyadic, not triadic. Well of course nothing wrong with...

Well biology is lucky. It is just damn obvious that life (and mind) are irreducibly semiotic in their nature. (And ironic that physicists like Schrodi...

Yep. But all foundational approaches end up mystical in philosophy of maths. Is Platonism any less bonkers? So yes, this is rather like intuitionism. ...

Peirce operates at a deeper level of generality so his continuum would be "holey" in the sense of being fundamentally indeterminate. That is, either t...

But does 1 = 1.000... in your book? Or is there some reason why we don't have to treat it as a convergent limit as well?

Ha. Tom really isn't keeping up with the argument. Yep. SophistiCat is talking the language of constraints. So by 1, do you really mean 1.000... ? ;)

If you read what I said, I did say that maths is the projection of images of perfection on to the imperfect world of experience. So the difference in ...

Getting back to the Peircean conception of continuity, what comes through in that paper for me is the Gestalt nature of his argument. From the recogni...

But that would be just as bad from my point of view because no one could deny the "unreasonable effectiveness" of maths. In my own lifetime, it has be...

But the point of semiosis is to get away from that very notion that either cognition or experience are "representational" - data displays in the head....

Remind me next time you go around accusing folk of Scientism. I too will get all PC on your arse. Meanwhile note that the fair implication of what I w...

Again, on what grounds precisely? Fishfry started it. And I am keeping the joke going to make a serious point. My initial remark was mild - talking of...

So this is honestly your idea of a brutal put-down?... Well you can just go fuck off. ;)

Yeah. So there are a variety of threads - many purely social. But clearly you are hoping - like me - for a properly scholarly discussion with referenc...

Of course I agree that maths is highly successful. But what you call finessing, I am calling being studiedly indifferent. So yes - a thousand time yes...

You are very sensitive. I apologise if you have feelings that are easily hurt. But is this my problem or your problem? I'm used to a robust level of d...

This is rather the point of Peircean semiotics. We deal with reality by replacing it with a system of completely definite signs. And mathematics is si...

That is the flipside of this. Wholes must exist to make sense of parts. But those wholes must crisply exist and not be indeterminate. And those only c...

So you defined a point as a howling inconsistency - the very thing that can't exist? The zero dimensionality that somehow still occupies a place withi...

How can that be satisfactory in a philosophical sense? If you can divide the point on one of its sides, why can't the next cut divide it to its other ...

Continuity can only be relative to discreetness (at least in actualised existence). That is, continuity Is defined by the lack of it other. So even sp...

You are better off asking aletheist that as that is his argument. And I am certainly no Bergsonite.

I think Rich is right that maths is generally premised on the notion of atomistic constructability and so is anti-continuity in that sense. (And that ...

Again this is an example of rationally seeking a way for the part to speak for the whole. What can't be achieved via actualisation can be supported by...

I think the issue here has been metaphysical - so neither everyday, nor mathematical. Although the mathematics of course has to have some grounds for ...

That would be why probability ranges from 0 to 1 then? Categorical differences are measured relatively in fact?

Symmetry broken simply is symmetry broken on just a single scale. So it is easily reversed. There is no real separation of what just got separated and...

No problem. I understand it is a dense issue. But as SX indicates, we can deal with actual similarity and difference in the world with an apparent int...

You mentioned the relevance of transversing the Planck scale. And while I applaud taking the physical facts seriously, in fact any exactness of locati...

MU is right that it has to be more complex than that. Talk of actually counting smuggles in the necessity of the maker of the infinesimal divisions or...

Great. The essential thing is not to be scared of complexity. Metaphysical analysis always arrives at dichotomous contrasts. Logical intelligibility i...

Similarity and difference are a metaphysical dichotomy. So each is defined in terms of being not the other. Or rather, in practice as the breaking of ...

The story in a nutshell. Points are a fiction here. The reality being modelled is the usual irreducibly complex thing of a vector - a composite of the...

Yep, simple isn't it. If you actually break things apart, they are no longer in a relation. Again, close reading will show that I stress that this is ...

Don't pretend to be so dim. Maximising the separation is night and day different from breaking the connection.

Are your close reading skills really as challenged as you pretend?

Get back to me when you want to discuss what I actually said and not what you are pretending I said.

If you want to discuss this seriously, define madnesss properly. Are you talking paranoia or bipolar mania or what? A primary symptom of schizophrenia...

You sound threatened somehow.

And I find your replies trivial.

Why do you have to drag Trump into every conversation? But yes I guess.

Yep. Decoherence - at the level of heuristic principle - says all the troubling indeterminacy disapears in the bulk behaviour. So that probabilistic v...

Simply put, if the error is external, then the mind simply has to make a better effort at knowing the world truly. But if instead the error is interna...

What's the problem? Is deflection your only defence?

Nope. It is the semiotic interaction between the realms of sign and materiality that allow that. Computation explicitly rules out the interaction betw...

So you mean ... exactly what I said then? Ie: Holism is four cause modelling, reductionism is just the two. And simpler can be better when humans mere...

Still this dualistic crackpottery. A computational simulation is of course not the real thing. It is a simulation of the real thing's formal organisat...