On 11/4/2012 9:45 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 03 Nov 2012, at 13:06, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 11/3/2012 6:08 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
No, that cannot be the case since statements do not even exist
if the framework or theory that defines them does not exist,
therefore there is not 'truth' for a non-exitence entity.
Brent already debunked this. The truth of a statement does not need
the existence of the statement. You confuse again the truth of
1+1=2, with a possible claim of that truth, like "1+1=2".
<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/horsefeathers>! How is the
truth of an arithmetic statement separable from any claim of that truth?
Explain me how the truth of an arithmetical truth depends on its being
claimed or not.
I am using the possibility of a claim to make my argument, not any
actual instance of a claim. There is a difference. In comp there are
claims that such and such know or believe or bet. I am trying to widen
our thinking of how the potentials of acts is important.
What is the possible value of a statement that we can make no claims
We can make claim about them, but we don't need to do that for them
being true or false.
Who are the "we" that you refer to?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at