# Re: Maudlin & How many times does COMP have to be false before its false?

```
On Feb 17, 6:14 pm, benjayk <benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 1Z wrote:
>
> > On Feb 17, 3:10 pm, benjayk <benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> 1Z wrote:
>
> >> >> >> Comp will imply that such a primary matter cannnot interfer at all
> >> >> >> with your consciousness, so that IF comp is correct physics has to
> >> be
> >> >> >> reduced to number theory, and such a primary matter is an invisible
> >> >> >> epiphenomena.
>
> >> >> > Physics cannot be eliminated in favour of non existent numbers.
> >> >> > Numbers
> >> >> > have to exist for the conclusion to follow
>
> >> >> Physics is not eliminated, on the contrary, physics is explained from
> >>
> >> >> something non physical.
>
> >> > The anti realist position is not that numbers are some existing non-
> >> > physical
> >> > thing: it is that they are not existent at all.
>
> >> If numbers don't exist at all, what does a statement that seems very much
> >> like a non-fictional and true statement, like "I have two hands" mean?
>
> > It's asserting the existence of hands, not numbers.
>
> You can't have one without the other.
> The statement "2 hands exists" requires that "2 of something" (the number 2)
> exists.```
```
The idea that "2 hands exist" implies that 2 exists implies that 3
things exist (the left hand, the  right hand and "two")

> 1Z wrote:
>
> >> If you have two hands, two does exists, otherwise you couldn't have two
> >> of
> >> something, right?
>
> > And if you have none of something, none exists.
>
> Well, so zero exists, I have no problem with that.
>
> 1Z wrote:
>
> >> Or is it a fictional statement?
>
> > Nope. You seem to think every word in a true sentence must
> > have a separate referent. However, "and", "or", "is", "not" etc
> > do not have separate referents. A true sentence must refer *as a
> > whole*
> > to some state of affairs. That is the only requirement.
>
> Not every word must have an object as referent, but every word implies the
> existence of an object that is connected to the word.

> If it is meaningful to use the word "and", "something and something" or a
> conjunction exists, if it is meaningful to use the word "or", "something or
> something" or a disjunction exists, if it is meaningful to use the word
> "is",

To  say "there is an existing statue of liberty" says nothing more
that "there is a statue of liberty"

>"something existing" or simply existence exists, if it is meaningful
> to use the word "not", "something that does not exist" or absence exist
> (existing in the absolute sense and not existing relative to something else)
> and if if it is meaningful to use the word "two", "two of something" or the
> number 2 exists.

Nope. To say that two of something exist is not to say two exists.

> View this message in
> context:http://old.nabble.com/Maudlin---How-many-times-does-COMP-have-to-be-f...
> Sent from the Everything List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to