''For two things to say that they are identical is nonsense and
for one to say that it is identical with itself says nothing.''
Some Wittgenstein in the mix. |
The assertion that politics is like chess is refuted by Gasparov
himself . BTW I would prefer Federer above Gasparov as
new President of Russian Federation. |
Cognitive dissonance result in this forum in calling names
or strawman construction. in addition blame to write English
as ''second language''. What an opponents ! |
Dear Lew, When Kant was asked by the German king: ''Professor
is there something new in science''? Kant answer was:
''does Your majesty know the old''? |
The meaning of an word is its contribution to the meaning of an sentence or statement. This was Frege's opinion. Who would
believe that tzh21y could refute Frege? He deed not need more
than one word. |
ebm, Eglish is my 4th language. |
millercarbon, I am atheist totally innocent reg. any religion . |
You mentioned Alan Watts and have obviously no idea
why. Alan was ''expert'' in ''all kinds of religions''.
BTW ''anything'' like ''everything'' or ''all'' are universal
quantifiers which are used to formulate generality. But
those are not ''names'' with referring function. So what
do you mean with ''anything''? Is that the ''ópposite'' of
''something''? Both make no sense in isolation. |
If this is your contribution on ''what cartridges there are?''
then we don't need your reference to Alan Watts.
I am not interested in religious questions and made that
clear. Mr. Watts has no idea what he is talking about.
Anyone can check this on internet. Provided one is familiar
with ''existence issue'' .
|
''The issue of existence'' is the same as ''what there is''.
The case of Higgs particles may enlighten the problem.
Higgs invented ''boson particle'' in order to improve the
theory. So every particle physicist knew what ''boson
particle means'' (in the sense of contribution to the theory)
but nobody knew if this particle EXIST. So we in Europe
have build 27 km long particle accelerator in Cern to prove
or refute the existence of Higgs particle. After proving the
existence of this particle the theory was saved. Because
success is rewording the new accelerator of 100 km length
will be build costing 23 billion euro's.
Such proves are not known in relation to existence of God.
Those are always verbal. One should discriminate between
talking about language (aka ''meaning'') and extra linguistic
reality. Pegasus or unicorns are linguistic but if one want to
hunt unicorns in Africa or fly on Pegasus I wish them success.
BTW the lack of knowledge by ''some'' members is disturbing.
|
The French ''enlightenment'' is understood in some countries
as ''well-read'' in contraposition to ''poorly educated''. This
explains high expectation from ''literature'' to explain the
world. Hence ''tell me what you read and I shell tell you who
you are!'' So we got ''scientist'' after their typewriters in their
study fantasizing about the world. There were ''readers clubs''
everywhere were newest books were discussed. The members
consider themselves as ''elite''. So, for example, in Germany everybody knew who Goethe and Hegel was/is but hardly any
who Frege the father of modern logic is. He is, mirabile dictu,
better known in USA than Germany. So if one want to study
Frege he should first learn English.
|
Gavagai and mathematics. By putting ''theory of meaning''
against ''theory of reference'' Quine constructed his Gavagai
as ''unclear reference''. But the ''background'' is what kinds
of objects or entities ''the numbers are'' . Frege had no difficulty
to see them as ''objects''. But his definition was ''extension of
terms or concepts''. Aka ''any object that is extension of some
concept''. Actually ''sets'', ''properties'' and '' classes'' are
logically ''the same'' because all assume ''members''. Hence
''set theoretic'' reduction of complexity. |
Holmz, My other languages are German, Dutch and Serbo-
Croatian. I also learned Russian as obligatory language
for 6 years at gymnasium. But I rarely used Russian.
The ''ontological commitment'' is entailed in ''existential
quantifier'' The universal is:
''for all x Fx& Gx''
Existential is
''some x ARE Fx& Gx''
In addition to sentence form: ''x is P'' all ''forms'' are expressed
in terms of properties of objects.
But is ''brother'' some kind of object with certain properties or
relational concept by family ''places'' such that bigger
families imply more places? Industrial society have ''small
families'' , agricultural ''big families''. In my native Serbia there
are no expressions '' cousin'' and ''nephew''. We are all brothers
and sisters along the ''lines'' of brothers and sisters of our parents.
In Holland the marriage between cousin and nephew is allowed
in Serbia not even imaginable between brother and sister.
|
I expected Lew to ''shine in'' regarding English as second language.
He participated in many scientific gatherings so he must be
confronted with ,say, ''Chinese or Japanese English''. Deed he
understand his colleague with ''bad English'' or deed he avoid
them because of ''language problem''? I assume scientific terminology familiar to all members of the same ''domain'' of
research.
|
pedroeb, never heard ''cogito ergo sum''? |
streadmerdude, Are you forced by someone to react to this
thread? You can simply pass over. There are more threads.
Nothing to your liking? BTW you can complain by the moderator.
An novice with 51 posts so not well informed. |
There are all kinds of rules. So ''there are rules''. Are those ''normative'' in the sense of prescribing certain behaviour?
Are rules ''truth -functional''? That is can't they be true or false?
Can terms or concepts be true or false or are those only
some ''special kinds of sentences or statements''? There are
different kinds of rules in different ''cultures'' or countries, So
they are obviously not universal . Who determines their
boundaries? I got all kinds of reprimands regarding implicit
stated rules. Those then are assumed to be ''natural''? Are
people programmed with them together with native language
and its grammar which is also ''loaded'' with rules? Can all
statements be put in '' s is P'' (subject IS predicate) sentence
form? In this thread we see this ''grammar form'' as ,uh, a
rule. Some of the members even told me that ''Croat''- and
''Serbian language '' are not the same. Probably because
of some rule of his own. How many English languages are
only in England ? How many in Germany or Holland? I can
hear difference between Dutch dialects . What are the differences
between programmed computers and programmed people?
|
''The logic'' of reactions to my thread. I started this thread
with a kind of introduction to ''what there is'' in general and
limited the extension to ''what analog component there are''
in particular cartridges. I even named Raul and chakster
as example of worthwhile contributors. But there was not
one single reaction about ''what cartridges there are'' but
the most were critical remarks about my philosophical
''content''. However my reactions were only reactions to
reaction of the members. Who then should be blamed? |
Kant wrote next to ''pure reason'' also an book about ''practical
reason''. I ever started an thread about ''irreparable cartridges''
caused by my loss of Sony XL 88D (D= diamond cantilever+
stylus from the same piece of diamond!). The reason was
''closed plastic body'' filled with dampening material. Such
body can't be opened for repair work. I noticed the similarity with
closed (very expensive) ZYX kinds and wanted to inform my
''forum friends''. To my big surprise there was no interest of
any kind. One can argue that ''practical reason'' is similar
to ''rational kind'' . But look at this thread . Unbelievable
interest and reactions to such ''esoteric thread''. |
Seneca (4 BC) was the first who wrote ''rationale enim animal est
homo'' ( Man is a rational animal ). Since then rationality become
a kind of virtue which all people wanted to ascribe to themselves
with Popper who added to the virtue by claiming his own ''rational criticism'' as the highest virtue. But if we look at the human
history we can state that Seneca was the first who formulated
''wishful thinking''. There is no such thing as ''rationality'' to find
in human history. On the contrary ; hate, revenge, robbery and
insatiable power hunger can much better explain human history.
Think of Egyptian pharaoh, Chinese emperors, Alexander,
Napoleon , Hitler, Stalin, Mao , etc. Our history teachers even
learned us to admire those creatures. Way then should our
forum be characterised as ''rational''?
|
Addendum, I forget to mention communist monarchy in North
Korea. |
Miyostin, The ''shorthand'' description of truth is ''correspondence
with reality''. The other is to state that something is a fact. But
the general opinion among logician, linguist and philosopher
of science is that those are statement , sentences or propositions.
This is to say that the only linguistic ''entity'' which can be true
or false are statement and not ''notions'', ''concepts'' or ''ideas''.
When we look at older philosopher like Kant, Hegel, etc. we
will see that they talk about ''concepts'' ( Begriffen ) as ''things''
that are true and are actually ''explaining'' the meaning of
concepts. Those are then put in ''opposition to each other'',
Since Frege and modern linguistic only statements are considered
to be either true or false (tertium non datur). However ''correspondence'' should not be seen as ''identity relation''. This
was Frege's error caused by his admiration of Kant. ''German sickness is the need to admire 'some' persons ''. Kant btw is also such person. So when in Germany don't ever criticise Kant and Hegel only very cautious.
They still need to discover Frege. So in this case Americans and
English (Russel) were first.
|
Maghister , You missed many important ''points''. Logic
does not say which propositions are true or false but that
two contradictory propositions can't be both true. Also
that from false assertion no true deductions can be made.
Also that proposition are true or false independent from
our will. Then rationality is not an ''thing'' or ''object'' but
human attitude expressed by actions. Those actions
have caused many disasters . You can't ignore this
with your verbalism nor by assuming ''consciousness'' as
the old Greek '' deus ex machina''. The ''meanings'' you
assume are meanings of words or ''concepts'' which are
statement about language not reality. The same illusion
as by old philosopher. In Germany btw they are still using
''notions'' or ''concepts'' so they missed the ''transition''
to sentences, statements or propositions as linguistic
entities which can be true or false independent of
our willingness.
|
Gustave Giuliaume is the greatest, Goete is the greatest,
Goedel is also the greatest and Einstein also.
While we are comparing ''analog stuff'' to discover which is
the best we must recognise that statements like ''Peter is
the longest guy in the class but George is even longer'' make
no sense. There is also this Roman nonsense about ''primus
inter pares'' . This is accepted all over the world as Roman
''principle '' but how is it possible that all are equal ?
That is why Frege stated that ''subject'' and ''predicate''
as grammar categories are not suitable for the science.
That is why he wanted to produce language suitable for
science. Regarding relational statement which presuppose
more ''subjects'' than one he proposed functions with two
or more arguments. If I am well informed this is used in
mathematics. Alas mathematics is my ''Achilles heel''.
w |
''Law science''? You have no idea what you are talking about. I am
lawyer you are obviously not. The lawyer consider their work as
''art'' not as science. Roman laws are product of long experience
with judicial procedures. Also ''reduced'' to private or civil laws.
Because of those procedures many civil court cases need
10 years for their completion which ''ordinary people'' can't
afford.
|
'Meta''-and ''object language''. We now know(?) that Frege
considered ''ordinary language'' as not suitable for science
and try to ''invent'' an scientific language which is called
''new logic''. Less known is Tarski's attempt to avoid paradoxes
which origin when we speak in the same language about our
language. To avoid this ''difficulty'' he invented the separation
between ''object language'' and ''meta language'' the later
as being ''about'' object language. The problem is that we get,
say, many , or even worst, too many meta languages.
This is, uh, my introduction to ''meta theory'' as mentioned in
my previous post.
|
Nobody has ever mentioned Engels , Marx best friend, as
scientist. However he was the only one who stated that
''each discipline'' ( science) has its own philosophy.
Everyone with an academic degree must know that in
his first semester (aka ''first year'') the so called ''subject
of study'' is learned as ''introduction to...''
In this ''introduction'' are formulated basic assertions of
the science involved and those ''basic assertions'' or
''premise of the discipline involved'' can be seen as
philosophy of this science. The curious thing is that such
''meta theory '' about own subject matter is learned in
the first year when students have no idea about their study.
The ''place'' of the ''meta theory'' should be placed in the
last year of the study when students ''got some idea''
about their study. Who can expect ''critical mind'' or ''critical
attitude '' by students in their first year of study?
|
roxy, ''it is boring'' is very different from 'boring according to me''.
Why are you assuming that ''it IS boring'' is , uh, ''general feeling''?
Do you think that you represent human kind by your statement?
Your are not ''the king'' of communist North Korea who even
surpassed the French king who stated ''the state that is I''.
''Assumed assumptions'' is a way of speaking . Economy of
language use is that many things are assumed to be known''
A : ''Federer won of course''. B: ''who is Federer? ''
X ''has the right'', etc , but why does he need to prove his
right to judge when Y claims ''the same right''. What does ''the
same right'' mean? Well the judge has, so to speak, an list
of legal conditions which need to be satisfy in order for X to get
the right which is assumed a priori to be already his . Something
like new owners of an home for which first payment is made.
That is when bank owns 99% of the home or its value while
the new buyers have the illusion to own a home. So it seems
much of our believes is ''based'' on sand?
|
roxy expect to be amused for free while his ''job'' is to give
his valuation in his ''economic language'' in which expression''dialogue'' does not exist but well ''monologue''.
According to
roxy I am the only member in this thread talking to my self.
Ergo there are, except roxy , no other members involved such
that he can be involved in discussion with other but only with
himself. This then can be called ''monologue''. I am too lazy
to count other members with their post on which my reaction,
sorry ''monologue'' followed. Because his ''economy'' imply
''savings'' this economy can do without ''dialogue'' or ''discussion''
because there is no place next to qualifications of contributions
of other . So our duty is to satisfy roxy with interesting for him
contribution in order to avoid his di-satisfaction. What an ...
|
Everybody IS a philosopher but the most think that philosophy is
a kind of profession. Say the opinion about people: the good and
the bad one, rude kind nice kind , poor and rich , etc,. etc, This
then can be called ''social philosophy''.
''Don't please mention politicians''. Well this than is ''political
philosophy''. One can't watch ''the world around him'' without
forming some opinion about what one has seen with his own
eye and ''elaborated '' with his own brain.
This explains so many participants in this thread. Even the ''real
philosopher'' as those who think to hate ''philosophy''; the ''dark
Matter'' kind.
Except those who like ''borders between categories'' the strict
followers of the rules ..'' It is not 'deed' Nandric ''but did''. Aka
''grammar rules'' but nearly nobody mentioned ''poor grammar''
with only ''S'' (subject) the ''IS'' ( connector) and ''P'' ( the
predicate). How many ''issues'' can't be expressed with such
poor base with only 3 words grammar ? |
The Germans have the most philosopher in the world with
possible exception of the ''old Greek''. What is however very
strange is their opinion about them: ''there is nothing more
easy than to refute an philosopher . The only thing one need
to do is to tread some other''. |
millecarbon, ''deed'' and ''did'' explain your problem . Ever heard
about ''brain drain'' from Europe to USA. Many Germans become
university professors in America. Lew told us to have had German professor who give them lessons about Kant. Then think of
Enstein, Goedel, Tarski , Carnap , etc,etc. Neither of them speak
English as ''first language'' nor with ''perfect grammar''. They
were obviously not invited to America because of their English.
What then for? I got not only ''did'' as correction of my ''deed''
but also remark : ''English is not your first language''. My answer
was that English is my 4th language. I have not seen reaction
of this member in this context. Well speaking about ''context'' .
There is the meaning of words to find. Not in isolation like ''did''
and ''deed''. The so called ''generative power of language'' is not
in grammar but in ''free combinations of morpheme'' by which
new words are ''composed'' with new meaning. You are only
demonstrating your lack of knowledge of which you are, uh,
not conscious . So, it seems, this ''entity'' consciousness does
''exist'' . Aka is ''there''. |
Mahgister (10-16-21)
''Anybody who read about logic know Frege's drama''.
From this statement those who are familiar with Frege's
work can deduce that mahgister has no idea about Frege.
Frege is called ''the father of modern logic''. So his logic
was his triumph. The drama apply to his mathematical
work. His ''magnum opus'' Grundgesetze ( Foundation
of mathematics) contained an paradox which was discovered
by Russel. BTW ''set paradoxes'' were known problem
of set theory. Many attempts are made to solve the problem. However later mathematician were so impressed by Frege's
work on mathematics that they corrected the paradox. The
result is now called Frege's theorem.
(Zalta, Boolos, Burgess,Hale, e.a.)
However the limit was his advice not to read Frege but Rudolf
Steiner. What an arrogant nitwit.
|
I will react to two posts and then stop my contributions.
First about ''grammar wonder''. As is know American
make difference between their ''great'', ''mediocre '' and
''worthless writers''. But they all share the same grammar.
This of course apply for all ''nations'' which obviously must
have ''national literature'' in order to compete with other
nations. In the past we also have had ''national science''
with the question which is the best: German, English,
Russian or American.
Now look at the kids all over the world. At the age of 4 they
speak each language whatever. How long you think an
English teacher will need to learn Chinese or Japanese?
I am not sure but think that Chomsky called ''language capability''
as, say, gift of mother nature. Do 4 years kids know what grammar
is ? This capability seems to work till the age of 12 (?)
|
