No, I am saying that 'things existing',only has meaning in the context of language users. Scenarios 'prior to human observers' is an oxymoron because you the current speaker are the observer of such a scenario in 'your minds eye' as we speak. The fact that we can visualize such scenarios which have explanatory utility for current events is an entirely human activity.Are you claiming that nothing existed prior to language? Are you claiming that nothing exists prior to our reporting upon it?
No, I am saying that 'things existing',only has meaning in the context of language users. Scenarios 'prior to human observers' is an oxymoron because you the current speaker are the observer of such a scenario in 'your minds eye' as we speak. The fact that we can visualize such scenarios which have explanatory utility for current events is an entirely human activity. — fresco
The term "existence" exists. All terms are existentially dependent upon language use. All language use is existentially dependent upon pre-linguistic thought/belief. All thought/belief consists entirely of meaningful correlations drawn between different things. All correlation presupposes the existence of it's own content, regardless of further subsequent qualification. — creativesoul
What does the notion of "relative" existence add here? Better yet, does it help or hinder our understanding? — creativesoul
...that could be argued. What is the less short answer? — Merkwurdichliebe
The term "existence" exists. All terms are existentially dependent upon language use. All language use is existentially dependent upon pre-linguistic thought/belief. All thought/belief consists entirely of meaningful correlations drawn between different things. All correlation presupposes the existence of it's own content, regardless of further subsequent qualification.
— creativesoul
That, there, is very clever. :up:
(I'm sure someone even more clever will come along and deconstruct it with their innate genius :roll: .) — Merkwurdichliebe
It has been argued for. Without subsequent refutation and/or valid objection it does not need to be further argued. I'm seeing where it leads. — creativesoul
Anyone is more than welcome to try. I would think that if it could be done, it would have been by now. Folk around these parts carry axes... — creativesoul
Anyone is more than welcome to try. I would think that if it could be done, it would have been by now. Folk around these parts carry axes...
— creativesoul
What they need is a feller buncher, like what you drive. — Merkwurdichliebe
Are you wanting to get into Kantian notions, synthetic apriori, in particular? — creativesoul
Partly, not entirely.All thought/belief consists entirely of meaningful correlations drawn between different things. — Merkwurdichliebe
It doesn't need that relation to be a screwdriver, but the relation is an inevitable consequence — Shamshir
A screwdriver is always a screwdriver. With the added meaning that relation grsnts, it becomes a screwdriver+.
Go back to the first sentence and realise the meaning dissolves like salt in water. — Shamshir
And the original always holds these parts, regardless of their discovery. — Shamshir
It merely alters the perception of the object. The object remains the same throughout all instances, but relative to the observer it alternates, due to the changes occuring with the observer; which is to say discovery. — Shamshir
What even is a screwdriver? A sharp stick of metal.This would apply to, say, identifying the screwdriver as an ice pick. Perhaps, a screwdriver by any other name? — Merkwurdichliebe
What even is a screwdriver? A sharp stick of metal.
Can you use a knife as a screwdriver? You can.
But you don't, because you the observer choose not to, not because they are intrinsically different.
But you can't cut with a screwdriver, right?
You can, using the tip - which is the way you cut a with box cutters and box cutters are essentially pocket knives. — Shamshir
Since what we call epistemology and ontology are well known to be inextricably linked, I can't see the problem. — fresco
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.