On Thursday, February 27, 2020 at 1:16:17 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Feb 2020, at 21:41, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > And we should be clear that what we are doing are assuming and > hypothesizing and reasoning about our assumptions and we are not bringing > anything into existence thereby. > > > > Exactly. > > When doing metaphysics seriously, we make the ontological commitment(s) > into hypotheses themselves. That is exactly what the materialists have > forgotten to do since the “political” (tyrannical) institutionalisation of > religion, but this comes from the abandon of the scientific attitude in > theology/metaphysics since about 1500 years. >
If anybody needs to repeat how serious they are so often... That there ever existed "a correct scientific attitude" of the pure Godzilla of pure truthful truthiness, widespread in the antique, with every citizen able to argue pure socratic, in front of the saint prophets of Plato and Plotinus, where everything existed in perfect harmony, while the saints could endlessly split hairs with folks about the inaccuracies of their ignorance towards the one big truth of truths... is fun but hardly historically accurate. You imply truth so often, you're running risk of intimidating the current US president. The existential status of abstract mathematical objects can be seen to be on the same level as Sher- or Shylock. And if we elevate them via "hold on, abstract objects flow into engineering and are therefore productive in our world, which Sherlock isn't", who knows... maybe some Sherlogician Nazis will take over the world by posting on a list with a theory that the property of being a unicorn exists in the broad platonic sense, even without any instantiated unicorns... you can derive numbers from unicorns by asking: what does a unicorn have? A horn, so what number corresponds most closely to the most platonic attribute of said horn? We have derived the number one. Now, compare that to how many horns no unicorns have, e.g. a crab. It is obvious that no unicorns implies the emptiness of space before the arrival of the unicorn our savior Jesushorn. He was the one-unicorn and those that followed became the second, the third, the fourth etc. disciples and their tales and mathemagical adventures led them to teach Pythagoras about triangles and Plato about platonism. Whatever people make true or fictional - outside the rather transparent self-parenting validation of their own views - what do they get out of it besides money, influence, nothing but the whole truth so help them godzilla of ultimate truthfulness? PGC -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/705362c8-9a06-476e-bdaf-522bf646a0ea%40googlegroups.com.
