Jon, List,
I think, the dimensionality of a line or of a surface is only then integer (1 or 2), if the line is straight, or the surface is even. Otherwise, the dimensionality of the line is between 1 and 2, or of the surface it is between 2 and 3.
Best, Helmut
09. Oktober 2021 um
Edwina, Margaretha, List,
I want to get back to Margaretha´s argument-metaphors, a bit late, now the topic is Popper, but anyway, Popper wrote about the open society and its enemies, and I think that Margaretha´s metaphors can help us to be an open society, and not become its enemies:
Supplement: Modern conspiracy theories are based on plausibility. In our western cultures, many important things too are based merely on plausibility, e.g. the value of money, the leading position of a manager, close to everything. No big difference from how things work at remote places in
Jon, Edwina, Gary, List,
Jon, you wrote:
"These are Peirce's explicitly stated beliefs--mind is primordial, such that matter is a peculiar sort of mind; the psychical law is primordial, such that the physical law is derived and special; and at any assignable date, our universe of existence
d accurately ascribe to him the belief that mind is not primordial. Of course, anyone is free to disagree with him about this, as Edwina clearly does.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAla
cause it's not a mechanical transfer of meaning from Text to Person. It's an interpretation - and that means that each of us can have our own understanding of that text. And so- we can differ in our interpretations.
Edwina
On Sat 25/09/21 11:40 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Ed
tian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 10:40 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Edwina, List,
To me your points make sense. That matter is a subclass of mind (effete mind), doesn´t mean, that mind is primordial
Edwina, List,
To me your points make sense. That matter is a subclass of mind (effete mind), doesn´t mean, that mind is primordial, if it cannot exist without its subset matter. That it cannot exist without matter, makes sense, as it is triadic. The sign triad too cannot exist without any of
List,
I have not understood the conclusion, that the universe is a sign. Is it: "The universe consists of signs, all of these signs are consistent (compatible, function according to the same laws), so the universe is a sign"?
But a sign needs an interpreter. A human interpreter may
Jon, List,
I think, we should accept, that God cannot be reverse-engineered. On one hand I guess it has to do with Goedel´s incompleteness-theorem: The parts of something cannot completely understand the something, and, not at all, its maker. On the other hand, if we had a deductive access to
List,
regarding the question, whether God is a person or not, I have the following considerations:
- Did Peirce write, that for him, God is real but does not exist?
- In this case, does "real, but not existing" mean, that the reality exists independently of instantiation, and is not
is nothing intrinsically Platonic about this; in fact, it is affirmed by the medieval scholastic theologians, who were primarily Aristotelians.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter
Edwina, List,
The term "transcendent", I think, is mostly known due to Kant, at least to me, and for Kant "transcendent" were the conditions of the possibility of knowledge. "condition" in the sense of "prerequisite", not of "state" ("Bedingungen der Möglichkeit von Erkenntnis"). "Knowledge"
List,
on one hand, Peirce´s evolutieon theory, synechism, tychism, concept of universal quasi-mind, is pantheistic, on the other hand, Jon A. S. has provided many citations, that show, that Peirce was a theist. I don´t see this as a contradiction: There might be two supreme instances: The
Edwina, List,
Is the difference between pantheism / universal quasi-mind, and theism, that theism says, that God is a person you can talk to, and also is the creator of the universe, so exists independently of it?
To the first property, the person, I would say, why should the universal
Supplement: Sorry, that was just a short depressive misanthropic seizure, now I am over it again. Culture is ok.
Jon, List
I thought, "persona" would come from "personare", "per" meaning "through", and "sonare" meaning to make sound, so "persona" is the mask, through which the
Jon, List
I thought, "persona" would come from "personare", "per" meaning "through", and "sonare" meaning to make sound, so "persona" is the mask, through which the actor´s sound of speech comes through. What I have not understood, is why the Roman actors wore masks. Did they consider
Jon, List,
Is that panentheism? And, what distinguishes panentheism from pantheism, is that a fundamental distinction, is it two different concepts of "universe", one excluding, one including its origin and metaphysics, which is some question, nobody ever can answer, so trying is futile, and
tions in all of life. This is not similar, I think, to the monotheistic God. The Gitche Manitou is a supreme life force - and is animistic rather than a monotheistic god.
I don't think that the Catholic use of 'saints' is comparable to polytheism! Heh - that would be something to talk about!
Edwina
Edwina, JAS, List,
I have read, that "religion" either means "reading again", or, more likely, "reconnection". In the more likely latter case, it should be a reconnection with a higher authority (or more of them), not merely a form of behavior. Ok, the "re" in "reconnection" suggests
Jon, Gary R., List
I think, plausibility is an interesting dimension. Is it the result of Ockham´s razor? Obviously it is a dimension of abduction/retroduction, and has to do with counting backwards: The biggest plausibility is what requires the least number of explanations. Like the concept
of unconscious forms of bias and prejudice that might shape our experience?
--Jeff
Jeffrey Downard
Associate Professor
Department of Philosophy
Northern Arizona University
(o) 928 523-8354
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu on behalf of Helmut Raulien
Sent: Friday, August 27, 20
Gary f.
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu On Behalf Of Helmut Raulien
Sent: 27-Aug-21 13:07
To: g...@gnusystems.ca
Cc: 'Peirce-L'
Subject: Aw: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne : Slip & Slide 34
Gary F., List
You wrote:
"what appears is entirely open to assured o
Gary F., List
You wrote:
"what appears is entirely open to assured observation. There is no doubt whatever that what appears, appears.".
I think, seeming and appearing are the same, just with emphasizing different points of view. Both are triadic: A system "A" makes an object "B"
Edwina, Gary R, List
I agree that it is not conflation, but the difference between experience and analysis. More generally, it is the difference between composition and classification. A sign is always composed triadically: O-R-I. A stimulus is always part of this triadic relation, otherwise
Gary, Gary, John, List,
That wasnt John but me, who changed the subject line. Just so you dont blame John!
Best, Helmut
24. August 2021 um 07:01 Uhr
"Gary Richmond"
wrote:
Gary F, John, List,
JFS wrote:
Therefore, I believe that 'diagram' is the best word to use in
om CP 1.533 in an earlier post. Since “Quality” is Peirce’s first choice for a word representing Firstness, it’s a natural choice in a context where he needs to distinguish it from other kinds of “possibility.”
Gary f.
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
Sent: 22-A
for a word representing Firstness, it’s a natural choice in a context where he needs to distinguish it from other kinds of “possibility.”
Gary f.
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
Sent: 22-Aug-21 22:30
To: Helmut Raulien
Cc: h.raul...@gmx.de; g...@gnusystems.ca
needs to distinguish it from other kinds of “possibility.”
Gary f.
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
Sent: 22-Aug-21 22:30
To: Helmut Raulien
Cc: h.raul...@gmx.de; g...@gnusystems.ca; 'Peirce-L'
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] possibility WAS Andre De Tienne: Slow Read
Supplement: What distinguishes the mammal-mouse-subset-relation from the possibility-exist-relation, is, that possibility always is the possibility of existence. This is the reason, why the statement may be regarded for true for terms. I dont see, how introducing a "qualitative
John, List
The term "possibility" in a global-universal context suggests secondness. But in a limited context, it doesnt have to. For example, a planet may be found, which has the properties to say that life is possible there. But when astronauts go there, they see that there is no life.
In
John, List
But if we weed out too many terms, we may not be able to talk anymore! Can we not instead "count on mathematicians" to tell us, how we should define and use "possibility" and "relation"?
Best, Helmut
21. August 2021 um 05:30 Uhr
"John F. Sowa"
wrote:
Gary F, Helmut,
Supplement: I have lost who is right or wrong, including Peirce. What I wanted to say, was: In mathematical language, the sentence "possibility implies a relation to what exists" is false. Maybe in ordinary English usage it is true, I dont know. But if we use the term "relation", we should
John, List
One might answer, that "relation" in this case is not involvement, but a "might-be"-affair. With this argument, "possibility implies a relation to what exists", translated, would be: "Possibility implies that it might be something what exists". But: This is not conform with the
atonic realism.
And I'm unaware that Platonism includes evolution.
Edwina
On Wed 18/08/21 11:49 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, List
I think it is not platonic idealism or platonism, but platonic realism, which suggests abstract forms as preexisting ideas or universals,
Supplement: Btw, I did not want to call you a tribalist. I know you are not. One question does not make one, only if somebody estimates the authority-method higher than the scientific method, and more often than the latter uses it, he/she may be suspected for a tribalist.
Edwina,
Edwina, List
I think it is not platonic idealism or platonism, but platonic realism, which suggests abstract forms as preexisting ideas or universals, but not blueprints for existing objects or ethical and esthetical matters, which too Platon claimed to be preexisting ideas.
About the
Jon, List
The classification of a sign is due to the three relations S-S, S-O, S-I. Is this another kind of projective reducibility, in which XxX, XxY, XxZ also determines the triadic relation XxYxZ, and determination in this case is classification?
Best,
Helmut
16. August 2021 um
our response and my post.
Can you rephrase you comments so that the connection is clarified?
Cheers
Jerry
On Aug 13, 2021, at 3:46 PM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Jerry, List
They are generated as potential signs, I guess, but to be signs, i.e.
st.
Can you rephrase you comments so that the connection is clarified?
Cheers
Jerry
On Aug 13, 2021, at 3:46 PM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Jerry, List
They are generated as potential signs, I guess, but to be signs, i.e. efficient signs with obj
Gary, Jon, List
To me it seems, that the whole topic can be boiled down to the difference between reality and being/existence. Mathematics is about reality independent of perception, of mathematicians and of symbol systems. Everything else is about existence due to accomplished perception. The
Jerry, List
They are generated as potential signs, I guess, but to be signs, i.e. efficient signs with object and interpretant, they have to be perceived, by perception put into existence. Being mathematically generated does not mean being generated by some symbol system. The symbols are means
n but respecting the determinations of their tri-relation.
Regards,
Robert Marty
Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy
fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty
https://martyrobert.academia.edu/
Le jeu. 12 août 2021 à 00:08, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> a écri
ine" is a kind of scanner perfected to radiograph the signs based on the preliminary phaneroscopy of each of the elements of the sign but respecting the determinations of their tri-relation.
Regards,
Robert Marty
Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy
fr.wikipe
Edwina, List
I dont think that De Tienne "tells us that it is essentially detached and isolate from the Real World to be almost irrelevant". After all, mathematics is based on axioms, which come from the real world. These are premisses. What I donot understand is, why these are called "purely
John, List
Yes! Like a weasel! Anyway I didn´t understand, what is wrong with a weasel. I propose it for mascot. Ok, only this thread´s one.
03. August 2021 um 22:18 Uhr
"John F. Sowa"
wrote:
Helmut> "Emergence" for me seems to be a not yet logically fully explained phenomenon.
John, Edwina, Jon A., List
"Emergence" for me seems to be a not yet logically fully explained phenomenon. My temporal assumption (not belief, in which I don´t believe) is, that it is individuation and downscaling. Meaning for the example of emergence of life, the universe is a living organism
theory, zero-point energy etc - and merge this research with fraudulent sales claims for fake 'miracle products' is illogical and unfounded.
Edwina
On Tue 03/08/21 10:54 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, List
Nothing is problematic about that, the way you have put it.
n Aubrey’s reference to weasel and he didn’t explain.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 3, 2021, at 10:16 AM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Edwina, List
I am absolutely not against using the term, but against stopping at for example: "Life has emerged due to nature´s inte
hods of: 'The Gods did it', or the later method of: 'Random accidents'. There could be a semiosic method!!
Edwina
On Tue 03/08/21 4:24 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Jon, Edwina, List
It becomes a weasel, if people use it for explaining something else, instead of
Jon, Edwina, List
It becomes a weasel, if people use it for explaining something else, instead of treating it as a yet not fully explained phenomenon. Then it is like the "dormative virtue" of Opium (Peirce). A pseudo-explanation.
Best
Helmut
02. August 2021 um 18:48 Uhr
"Jon
scientific method and instead, are generated and held within Peirce's other methods: tenacity, a priori and authority.
Edwina
On Sun 25/07/21 1:00 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Jack, Edwina, List
Animals do have culture! What divides humans from animals is not culture, b
lief?
3] Graphs are not meant to translate from one language to another!! They are, in my view, meant only to show relationships. Period.
Edwina
On Sun 25/07/21 9:51 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, John, List
I think, when somebody, regardless of which language or cu
belief?
3] Graphs are not meant to translate from one language to another!! They are, in my view, meant only to show relationships. Period.
Edwina
On Sun 25/07/21 9:51 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, John, List
I think, when somebody, regardless of which language or cu
Edwina, John, List
I think, when somebody, regardless of which language or culture, reads a sentence, he*she does not jump to conclusions unless the sentence is read. So I guess that the role of the verb´s position should not be overestimated. Like culture in general should not. The Yoruba
n't think that it has a strong Peircean grounding because the categories, as 'modes of being', are about the nature of the relations those 'modes of being' engage in.
Edwina
On Mon 19/07/21 6:04 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Gary, Gary, List
There is a paper about systems Hi
s of being', are about the nature of the relations those 'modes of being' engage in.
Edwina
On Mon 19/07/21 6:04 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Gary, Gary, List
There is a paper about systems Hierarchies by Stanley N. Salthe: "Salthe ´12 Axiomathes.pdf". I have
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 1:55 PM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Gary, List
About the categories in phaneroscopy, and how they derive or not from logic and mathematics, I think that the systems hierarchies "composition" and "subsumption&
Gary, List
About the categories in phaneroscopy, and how they derive or not from logic and mathematics, I think that the systems hierarchies "composition" and "subsumption" (Stanley N. Salthe) can be used, with the third hierarchy "definition" that I am suggesting:
Composition (1ns) is not
ence.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 11:29 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Jon, List
List,
Donot underestimate the power of words. I think it is very dangerous to ideationally seperate the world in two. Martin Luther did that, and the result were first ca. 75000 peasants slaughtered, and later a 30 years long war. An (epistemic) gap is not an impermeable border, and I think it
Jon, List
I disagree with this "strictly hypothetical". In mathemathics, mostly there are hypotheses at the beginning, presumtions, which then are deductively proven or refuted by disproof or failed to prove. But, as I said, in mathematics also are surprising phenomena for subject matters
Robert, Jon, Gary, List
I think, the only thing that mathematics strictly is, is being self-referential, while all other sciences have to refer to mathematics. Phenomenology is not excluded from mathematics: I think, that in chaos theory phenomena like self-similarity and scales-invariance
Gary, List
I donot know the state of the art of mathemathics at Peirce´s time, but today, I would say, mathemathics is primary and totally general, not just hypothetical, and covers not only deduction, but also induction, is not only the basis for negative logic / sciences, but for positive as
ant in our consciousness of them. Semiotics depends on phaneroscopy, not the other way round) Questions about specific terms used in the definitions might help, though, if you’re still confused.
Gary f.
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu On Behalf Of Helmut Raulien
Sent: 9-Jul-21 09:48
Gary, List
Now I am confused about the definition of phenomenon, and accordingly phenomenology / phaneroscopy. If secondness, reaction, is a part of its, a phenomenon is not a first. I had thought it was. But firsts don´t have parts (see previous slide), so there cannot be a second of a first.
List,
to claim that a logical sequence is not dependent on time, would mean that the claimer has understood the nature of time. But I doubt, that anybody has. Is a universe with a space but no matter possible? Physicists say no, matter and space depend on each other. I find it likely that it
likewise it is possible to prescind Secondness from Thirdness. But Thirdness without Secondness would be absurd. ]]
As for involution and evolution, I would say they are neither kinds of argument nor kinds of separation, but kinds of logical relation.
Gary f.
From: Helmut Raulien
Sent: 28-Jun
Gary R
“Let everything happen to you
Beauty and terror
Just keep going
No feeling is final”
― Rainer Maria Rilke
Gary Richmond
Philosophy and Critical Thinking
Communication Studies
LaGuardia College of the City University of New York
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 a
ity University of New York
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 4:07 PM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Gary, List
Now I am confused. "already posited", so what? "2ns of 1ns", "3ns of 1ns"? Never heard of such things. Instead: 2ns and 3ns reentered
Gary Richmond
Philosophy and Critical Thinking
Communication Studies
LaGuardia College of the City University of New York
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 3:24 PM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
List,
Are primisense, altersense, medisense the categor
List,
Are primisense, altersense, medisense the categorial parts of consciousness, or the categories in general, or the three categorial parts of the/a phaneron? I thought the first (consciousness). And when phaneroscopy became the topic, I was thinking, phaneroscopy is the science of what
far as I am concerned.]]
If that doesn’t help, there’s a much longer explanation in Turning Signs 5: Inside Out (gnusystems.ca).
Gary f
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu <peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu> On Behalf Of Helmut Raulien
Sent: 19-Jun-21 07:32
To: a.bree...@upcmail.
List
Here again the maybe most frequently used quote about "phaneron", from the Commens Dictionary:
"
1905 | Adirondack Summer School Lectures | CP 1.284
Phaneroscopy is the description of the phaneron; and by the phaneron I mean the collective total of all that is in any way or in any
Edwina, Auke, List
I think there are different definitions (of truth and reality), without being contradictionary definitions. I dont think that "one definition defines it as the result of OUR actions of investigation", that would be anthropocentric / nominalistic. Peirce wrote it in the
List,
the term "red flag" is a red flag for me. When I hear or read it, I suspect people at work, who are not interested in a fair discussion, but in tribalistically separating the discussers in one group of the good ones, and one of the bad ones, identifying the bad ones due to their use
l gio 3 giu 2021, 19:03 Mauro Bertani <bertanima...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
Hi Hermut,
This is the sentence:
( a & && !c ) || ( a &&) || (!a & &) || (!a &&!b&)
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28+a+%26%26b+%26%26+%21c+%29+%7C%7C+%28+a+%
Sorry again, the formula is wrong somehow, now I cannot think anymore about this.
Sorry, the aka was wrong. Here the corrected PDF.
Hi Mauro, Jon, List
please look at the PDF attached (Venn diagrams).
Best
Helmut
03. Juni 2021 um 11:21 Uhr
"Mauro Bertani"
amp;&(c->a). I don't need either not or xor. In paradisiacal logic we can only talk about the determined and independently of our proposition there is always the limit case where the truth of our proposition is the conjunction of the variable. The hypothetical necessitates negation. Discovering ne
amp;&(c->a). I don't need either not or xor. In paradisiacal logic we can only talk about the determined and independently of our proposition there is always the limit case where the truth of our proposition is the conjunction of the variable. The hypothetical necessitates negation. Discov
alk about the determined and independently of our proposition there is always the limit case where the truth of our proposition is the conjunction of the variable. The hypothetical necessitates negation. Discovering necessitates negation.
Thanks in advance
Mauro
On Mon, 31 May 2021 at 22:41
y talk about the determined and independently of our proposition there is always the limit case where the truth of our proposition is the conjunction of the variable. The hypothetical necessitates negation. Discovering necessitates negation.
Thanks in advance
Mauro
On Mon, 31 May 2021 at 22:41, H
Dear Mauro, List
I think, that has nothing to do with "if then else", and my opinion was false, I had later in the thread corrected it due to the "ex falso quod libet" rule.
If I have understood "If A then B else C" correctly ("else" meaning either B or C, not both), it implies that A = B,
c, but probably the most relevant to your question is here: Objecting and Realizing (TS ·12) (gnusystems.ca) . Actually there’s more of Peirce than of me in it, but I hope there’s no objection to that.
Gary f.
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu On Behalf Of Helmut Raulien
Sent: 23-May-21 1
elation of two instants of time, or what is the same thing as the relation between a logical antecedent and consequent.’
Gary f.
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu On Behalf Of Helmut Raulien
Sent: 22-May-21 18:13
Supplement: The logical connection between premiss and rule ca
Supplement: The logical connection between premiss and rule cannot be symbolized with logical notation including EGs. It is a temporal connection, a relation between past and present. Logic notation merely notes the status of the present. Implication implies this temporal relation, and
Jon, Jon, List
Wikipedia says there are two kinds of "ex falso quod libet": First the contradiction "A and not A", and secondly the counterfactual material implication "If A then B" with A being false. From "every unicorn is pink" follows, that this is true, and anything else also is. These
Supplement: A third way of classically synchronizing the two propositions may be the counterfactual material implication, the "ex falso quodlibet" in a broader sense. Then "if it is a unicorn, it is pink" is true, and also "If it is a unicorn, it is pink, all cats are dogs, Santa Claus is
List,
Does anybody know an example which justifies intuitionistic logic, so in which classical logic fails? I think Jon, A.S., you once gave me the following example:
"Every unicorn is pink" is false, but "There is no unicorn that is not pink" is true.
"Every unicorn is pink" is false,
The Salthe- linkl I gave shows the search. I meant this, I hope it works now:
Jon, Daniel, List,
I think there are two kinds of extension: Of the mind and of the memory. Peirce´s inkstand is an extension of the mind. A map or an encyclopedy is an extension of the memory. Over both one has control, ownership and direct access without other minds participating. Tools
Daniel, List,
I think, this topic is very interesting especially in our digital era. When, long time ago, I had served army-replacement duty as a driver for handicapped children, and I first was a co-driver, I could never at all remember the routes. Only when I had to check them out on a map
Supplement: I guess, these are strong kinds of middle value, and possibility or vagueness are weak kinds, because you can put "possibly" or "vaguely" outside the brackets, and then calculate classically without the middle.
John, List,
Maybe there are at least two kinds of middle
ttps://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intuitionism/).
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:11 AM Helmut Raulien &
List,
thank you, Jon, for always presenting overwiews and summaries that help even people like me to gain more insight. I refer to:
"CSP: The sheet on which the graphs are written (called the sheet of assertion), as well as each portion of it, is a graph asserting that a recognized
John, List,
is it agreed, that there is a clear distinction between primitives and not-primitives? Or is there a scale of primitivity? E.g. I would say, that amongst operators for one item you might say, that the exists- operator is either the most primitive one, or you might also say, that it
e and false" I think is e.g. provided by a self-referential paradoxon.
Regardless of how many mistakes I have made now, I feel that I am starting to find logic more and more interesting, and am amazed, that somebody out of the far past, like Nagarjuna, has had so modern idea
ebody out of the far past, like Nagarjuna, has had so modern ideas.
Best, Helmut
06. Februar 2021 um 02:26 Uhr
"Helmut Raulien"
wrote:
Suppsupplement: The performative contradiction in step 2 is a bit more tricky than I have written: As "Every B" mea
t; would be false, it should be "Every image of a unicorn has the image of a horn". "Image" may be a mental or language- image too.
Step 3 is the consequence from unicorn to pink.
"There is no unicorn that is not pink":
Step 1: The same as above.
Ste
To write " A Tasmanian tiger does not exist' is NOT a universal or valid form. It refers to only one tiger. So, it is in 2ns. To write the universal correctly, it would be: NO Tasmanian tigers exist - and that's a universal, a 3ns.
I'm not sure of the point of your double negati
101 - 200 of 1018 matches
Mail list logo
