As I read the Stanford piece one thing seems right to me. If a proposition
is found to be untrue, that does not make the proposition itself unreal.
Similarly, if Donald Trump says immigrants are animals which is a
falsehood, his contention is very real indeed. If I say to my wife I am
fine when I have a particular pain, the statement may be false but it is
real. When I say everything is real I mean everything and if there is a
deity that can do more things than Kurzweil says we'll be able to do in 100
years, the scope of everything as a field from which to glean what is real
(relatively speaking) is not an insurmountable challenge.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Stephen C. Rose <stever...@gmail.com>
> A wonderful illumination of an unknown (to me) nook. I thought of O.R.
> when I was writing but did not have the knowledge whereof I spoke. But I am
> going to peruse further the excellent beginning and so forth. He joins my
> small pantheon of great unknowns. Whoever wrote the Stanford piece must
> join the group also Thank you. S
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:09 AM, John F Sowa <s...@bestweb.net> wrote:
>> On 5/17/2018 9:04 AM, Stephen C. Rose wrote:
>>> My point is simply that reality has all sorts of permutations and that
>>> to disclude things is to complexify.
>> I agree. And I recommend the anti-razor by Walter Chatton, who engaged
>> in years of debates with William of Ockham. Both Chatton and Ockham
>> were students of John Duns Scotus. Ockham was a nominalist who rejected
>> the realism of Scotus. But Chatton was a realist who defended Scotus
>> in debates with Ockham. (All three of them were Scots at Oxford.)
>> See https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/walter-chatton/
>> Brief summary of the anti-razor:
>> If a proposition p is true and its truth depends on the existence
>> of something x, then the existence of x must be assumed.
>> But Chatton stated his anti-razor in several different versions,
>> all of which imply my summary.
>> PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
>> PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
>> peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L
>> but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the
>> BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce
>> -l/peirce-l.htm .
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at