On Friday, October 26, 2018 at 10:03:07 PM UTC+2, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Friday, October 26, 2018 at 2:33:13 PM UTC-5, Tomas Pales wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, October 26, 2018 at 8:06:03 PM UTC+2, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>> >>> OK. But it seemed to me you said that is better not to make unnecessary >>> assumption. >>> >> >> My only ontological assumption is that existence is logical consistency. >> This assumption gives rise to the set-theoretic multiverse, and I don't >> mean just ZF or ZFC but all consistent versions of pure set theory. You add >> assumptions that restrict this set-theoretic multiverse to arithmetic. >> > > > > "Logical consistency" is likely not needed for existence. > > https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dialetheism/ >
I disagree. I already mentioned dialetheism and I think it's nonsensical because it accepts the existence of objects that are not what they are. Such "objects" are nothing. And unless you arbitrarily block logical explosion, one inconsistency will make all ontology meaningless, even the property of existence will not be different from non-existence. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
