On Jul 23, 6:05 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 11:11 am, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 22, 11:05 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Are you positing a universal substance of resemblance? How does it
> > > work?
> > No. I am proposing that things have properties, as an objective
> > fact,and that different things can have the same properties,
> > also as an objective fact.
> I don't think there is a such things as an objective property. If you
> are the only thing in the universe, you have no properties.

You need to argue that, not just proclaim it.

> It is only
> by relation to other things that properties can arise. I'm a human
> sized thing, so walls do not have the property of being a possible
> place for me to stand. If I'm a fly or ant sized thing, walls are
> great places to park, and my water comes in handy spheres. Is water a
> sphere or a formless fluid? Are spheres themselves spheres or are they
> flat planes when you are small enough to stand on their surface?

They're still spheres.

The examples you give are of properties, or  rather predicates
which are actually relations. However, relations can be obective
too. objective-subjective and intrinisic-relationa are orthogonal

> > > If i see two mounds of dirt they might look the same to me, but maybe
> > > they host two different ant colonies.
> > Then they resemble each other up to a point. That two things
> > resemble each other 90% is  still objective.
> They don't resemble each other 90% to the ant.

I suppose you mean it can;t perceive the resemblance.
But it they have 90% of their properties in common,
they resemble each other 90%. Objectively.

>Does your home resemble
> a stranger's home on the other side of the world? If you woke up
> there, would you be able to even get through your day normally?
> What if someone buried a 12 pound diamond under one mound and the
> other one had an IED set to detonate 12 pounds of C4 on contact? You
> can't tell the difference, but a bomb sniffing dog can. It's a
> different universe depending on what you are.

No. You perceive the same universe differently depending on
who you are.

> A cat is a pet to us, a
> monster to a mouse. Our hair is a forest to a mite. There's no way for
> us to find a universal common nature that makes one thing like
> another, even if they seem to be the 'same' thing to us. A does not
> equal A, except in our subjective awareness.
> Craig
> Craig

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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to