Don Wade

It is my opinion that the solution to the sorites paradox is not in the assumption of "vagueness" - as has been suggested. The solution lies in the me...

If it was space before the big bang, and space after the big bang - then what changed? Plus, light still only travels at a defined velocity in space. ...

I believe "Levels" will clear up a lot of the vagueness.

Yes, I think you're right. I see it in many instances.

Thanks Jack. Yes, Aristotle - in my opinion - was both good, and bad for philosophy. (Another discussion point.)

Ah, the beauty of Levels. A point we have not discussed is: What happens, in our minds, to one group of properties when we delibrately switch to anoth...

Jack, Please read my most recent post to: apokrisis. It gives a little more detail on the concept of levels.

Would you believe: "I'm glad you asked". In one sentence: Levels is the study of the hierarchy of property groupings. An example would be a 3-dimensio...

Yes! I believe we can construct a viable system that will serve us better than our present system. Our present system is based on 2500 year old concep...

Are you asking a question...?

Thanks for your input Apokrisis. You show great insight into early philosophy. In your writing you mentioned a "larger interest". I'm going to take yo...

Life is unpredictable. Not a long time ago many philosophers believed "if we we knew just 1 (one) thing everything else could be predicted" - but then...

Thanks Jack. Good to hear from you on this post. Yes, I'm familiar with the book, and the subject, and refer to the literature often. It seems the fuz...

Thanks, yes, lol, that is something!

I like your comment. I believe features of our language are based on our "perception" of what we define as reality. (That is, a non-vague reality). Wh...

I think the subject of vagueness is a "re-newed" field of study in philosophy. For the last 2,500 years man has pretty much accepted the findings of t...

Nihilism seems to have a specific definition - however, vagueness is just...vague. I don't see your thinking in reference to vagueness being absorbed ...

Could you give a little more detail as to how you could absorb vagueness?

Is there a metric as to how one would do that?

Your question: "How small can you go" seems to be a good basic question, at first, but the other support-information you listed is confusing. Are you ...

Yes, to me it is fun to think about. I believe it's a good example of how our brain works in dealing with specifics (one grain of sand), and generalit...

https://www.bing.com/search?q=paradox%20definition&pc=cosp&ptag=G6C24A11441EEDE3&form=CONMHP&conlogo=CT3210127 . The paradox is not the first thing yo...

There was a group of Germans that studied "visual grouping" back during the early 1900's. The study was called "Gestalt". https://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

The paradox is in the image - not in the actual number of grains of sand. There is no paradox in the actual number of grains of sand in the pile. The ...

Is the "shape" a paradox?

The problem, as stated in the sorites paradox, is not being able to determine at what point a group of grains of sand becomes a pile. Whatever number ...

Thanks for the response. It appears you are on the right track. There are many similar examples of the sorites paradox. They are easily missed though ...

I believe you are correct..in philosophy. Philosophy is not bound by the regidity of "science" - so, yes I believe you could make a convincing argumen...

Some interesting things happen when we think of a pile of sand. Example: "Sorites Paradox" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox . A grain o...

There seems to be many ways to express objects, or actions, as emergent. Scientist seem to shy away from the study of emergence because it seems too m...

Emergence is a lot like hunting and finding Easter Eggs. Sometimes, one can even find the so-called "prize egg". My opinion, (not even a theory), is: ...

Absolutely. Math is more exact. But, I believe math separates science and philosophy. To me, philosophy is a better tool (than math) in trying to visu...

Thanks for the reply! The other comments over the past 24 hours are also interesting as well. Hopefully, you and the others will read this response. O...

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330723666_Emergent_Quantum_Mechanics_David_Bohm_Centennial_Perspectives#:~:text=These%20properties%20are%20cl...

If we don't know the "who, or the how" - we may already be programmed by the machines.

"Existence" itself is an assumption. All existence, that we bieve we can prove, is based on assumptions. We assume things exist but threre's no way to...

Can one emphathize with their own brain? First, the brain has to create the "self" that does the introspection. The self that the brain creates is an ...

Good take Paul. There is too great a difference between the technology we have to put man on the moon, and the technology needed to put man on mars. I...

Good question. Is there really a difference between man and what man programmed?

The "swamp" programmed it.

A property in philosophy is defined as a description - not something that is owned: Property (philosophy) From Wikipedia In logic and philosophy (espe...

Yes. Classifying Properties is difficult. The philosopher David Hume defined some of those problems in his writings. Generally, properties is defined ...

Good thinking Paul! You may also want to consider how we perceive anything (visual) to even be able to ask the question of emergence. Even our thought...

I have a problem trying to understand "all" of anything.

How do you determine what something is from all angles?

Bcause of perspective, a truth can be false.

"Maybe this is a cheap way out, but I'd say that whatever fits your intuitions best is the most reliable "starting point" for "normal life" questions....

When the apple is envisioned, the seeds are not included in the vision, and when the seeds are envisioned, the apple is not a part of the vision. The ...

It is still a part of the apple, and occupies some of the same space.

I guess some folks see philosophy itself as being rdiculous nonsense.