> >> Ron: >> Any useful predicate is simple, and economical in explanation. > Tuukka: What is intelligible varies from person to person. This is intelligible to me. That should not be a problem for you, since you have the option to ignore this.
Ron: Then why waste both of our time. > Tuukka: > A predicate is not the same thing as an abstract noun. They are not required > to be abstract. "Concept" would be a more correct intuitively appealing > designation. > Ron: > No but a "nonrelativizably used" predicate is. A relativizably used predicate > is a concrete noun. > I'm just not sure how the term relativizably lends greater explanitory power. Tuukka: Incorrect. Nonrelativizably used predicates cannot be proven to have, or to not have, any properties. Hence, they may neither (provably) have nor not have the property of being an abstract noun. Nonrelativizability itself is not a property of a predicate, but a property of the way in which a predicate is used. Ron: Right, just like an abstract noun. If you would take the time to research how an abstract noun is used in grammar you would see how it relates to nonrelativizably used predicates. > Tukka: > I don't insist on using unappealing language. My work may be regarded as a > work in progress, and as such, names of things can be changed. But I am > currently using the name "nonrelativizably used predicate", because it is the > technically correct name for that thing, from a mathematical point of view. > Feel free to suggest a better name for more casual use! Not everyone is an > analytic philosopher. > > Ron: > Well its an "abstract noun" from a Grammatical point of view and from a > historical philosophic perspective > and as just a basic simple understanding. No not everyone is an analytic > philosopher.nor should they have > to be to understand what you are saying. Tuukka: Yes, they have to be, if they want to understand what I'm saying. Don't you tell me to dumb myself down. If everyone did that, it wouldn't be a pretty sight. Ron: Well then have fun sniffing your own farts, the ability to explain an idea in simple terms is the hallmark of a brilliant thinker. Shrouding your ideas in a complex esoteric language seems like putting up a bit of a smokescreen to hide the possibility that you really dont know what the heck you are talking about. If everyone would make an effort to clarify their meaning when expressing ideas it would indeed be a pretty sight. It would cut through alot of bullshit. .. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
