Tom Caylor wrote:
> 1Z wrote:
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> Le 09-nov.-06, à 14:07, 1Z a écrit :
>>>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>>> Le 31-oct.-06, à 19:37, 1Z a écrit :
>>>>>> Well, I think numbers don't exist AT ALL....
>>>>> I have not the slightest idea what you mean by that.
>>>> If you don't understand anti-Platonism, that would certainly explain
>>>> why you don't argue against it.
>>> I still don't understand what you mean by numbers does not exist at
>>> all.
>>> If that is "antiplatonism", it would help me if you could explain
>>> what is "antiplatonism", or better what could it mean that the numbers
>>> don't exist. We already agree they don't exist physically, but saying
>>> they does not exist at all ???
>> It means they don't non-physically exist either.
>> Mathematical claims about existence can be true
>> of false, but so can fictional claims like "Harry Potter exists
>> in Middle Earth"
>>>  Even Licorne exists in some sense,
>>> without referent in "the physical world", but with referent (meaning)
>>> in some fantasy worlds?
>> Fantasy worlds don't exist -- that's why they are called fantasy
>> worlds, --
>> Licornes don't exist, and Licornes' don't exist in fantasy worlds.
>> Meaning is *not* the same thing as reference (Bedeutung). That is the
>> box the anti-Platonist has climbed out of. Some terms have
>> referents (non-linguistic items they denote), others have only
>> "sense" (Sinn). Sense and reference are two dimensions
>> aspects of meaning, but not every term has both.
>> Sense is internal to langauge, it  a relationship between a
>> word/concept
>> and others. It is like a dictionary definition, whereas reference is
>> like
>> defining a word by pointing and saying "it is one of those".
>> But no-one has ever defined a Licorne that way, since
>> there is no Licorne to be pointed to. Mathematical concepts
>> are defined in terms of other mathematical concepts.
>> Mathematical reference is impossible and unnecessary.
>>> Why could numbers not exist in some similar
>>> sense, except that the number fantasy kiks back (as Tom has recalled
>>> recently).
>> Saying that Licornes exist in a fantasy world
>> is a cumbersome way of saying they don't
>> literally exist. Well, numbers don't literally
>> kick back. They don't interact causally
>> with my reality.
> What about:
> If (2^32582657)-1 is a prime number, I will not eat my hat.
> In all possible worlds where I always keep my promises, I will not eat
> my hat.
> This is causally a result of the fact that (2^32582657)-1 is a prime
> number.
> Tom

I think a clue is in the fact that you picked (2^32582657 -1) instead of 7.

Brent Meeker

 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to