Two big problems a la you just talking bs.

One, "Posty McPostface" is a proper name. Here's the definition of "proper name:" "a name used for an individual person, place, or organization"

Two, "France," "Pluto," etc. are "just a moniker." Moniker is another word for "name." Proper names are names.

The difference between a proper name and a name that's not a proper name is, for example, "Socrates" (proper name) and "philosopher" (not a proper name, though still a name)

One, "Posty McPostface" is a proper name. Here's the definition of "proper name:" "a name used for an individual person, place, or organization" — Terrapin Station

Posty McPostface doesn't denote me. It denotes your interactions with me on this forum through a form of contextualism. That's all I can say.

Just for fun, let's imagine that you're really Ned Block.

In what way does "Ned Block" denote you and not just various people's interactions with you via however they're interacting with you, but "Posty McPostface" doesn't denote you?

Maybe you don't know the conventional definition of "denote"?

From my perspective, by the way, it seems like either you're trolling or you're incredibly confused. (Although that almost seems to be the whole point to this board.)

Maybe you don't know the conventional definition of "denote"?

From my perspective, by the way, it seems like either you're trolling or you're incredibly confused. — Terrapin Station

I'm quite aware of the definition of 'denote'. But, Posty McPostface doesn't denote me as a person on these online forums. And, I'm not trolling.

I'm quite aware of the definition of 'denote'. But, Posty McPostface doesn't denote me as a person on these online forums. And, I'm not trolling. — Posty McPostface

Simply repeating that doesn't make it any less stupid.

Try answering the question I asked and maybe we can help you learn something.

Simply repeating that doesn't make it any less stupid.

Try answering the question I asked and maybe we can help you learn something. — Terrapin Station

What's the question again?

Just for fun, let's imagine that you're really Ned Block.

In what way does "Ned Block" denote you and not just various people's interactions with you via however they're interacting with you, but "Posty McPostface" doesn't denote you?

Just for fun, let's imagine that you're really Ned Block.

In what way does "Ned Block" denote you and not just various people's interactions with you via however they're interacting with you, but "Posty McPostface" doesn't denote you? — Terrapin Station

Posty McPostface doesn't denote me because I am not really Posty McPostface. It's just a nick not a name.

Posty McPostface doesn't denote me because I am not really Posty McPostface. It's just a nick not a name. — Posty McPostface

What makes someone "really" some name or other?

What makes someone "really" some name or other? — Terrapin Station

As much as I understand Kripke it's when a name is a direct referant to the object it denotes.

As much as I understand Kripke it's when a name is a direct referant to the object it denotes. — Posty McPostface

Kripke sucks, first off. No wonder you're confused.

You said that proper names are direct referents. "Posty McPostface" is a proper name per the definition of proper names.

You're claiming that it doesn't denote you . . . because denotation is when a name is a direct referent . . . --which is very shallowly circular.

You said that proper names are direct referents. "Posty McPostface" is a proper name per the definition of proper names. — Terrapin Station

No, because it doesn't denote me, the actual person posting under this nick.

You're claiming that it doesn't denote you . . . because denotation is when a name is a direct referent--which is very shallowly circular. — Terrapin Station

It makes perfect sense to me. Is Superman the same person as Clack Kent? Yes, under an alter-ego name.

No, because it doesn't denote me, the actual person posting under this nick. — Posty McPostface

If you handle doesn't reference you, the actual person, then who is writing all those great posts?

If you handle doesn't reference you, the actual person, then who is writing all those great posts? — Bitter Crank

My alter-ego, Posty McPostface. And, what wine do you suggest I buy this Friday? Hopefully something sweet and good.

In another forum far away and long ago, @Banno started a discussion similar to this one, is the divine stallion Pegasus, wings, hooves, balls, and all real? How about Frodo? Han Solo? the apostle Jack? Jesus, not to mention the esteemed Posty McPostface?

I know who Frodo, Han Solo, Pegasus, Jack, Jesus, and you do too. You may not have met them, but you know who they are. You even know a thing or two about them. They are real because they exist in the memories and thoughts of many people, including yours. You don't know who Xcwevw is. I don't either. He, she, it, or nothing doesn't exist in my mind or anybody else's.

Every shared name, handle, referent, moniker, or image that identifies an author connects to something real.

Yes, I realize there is no one named Posty McPostface and Posty McPostface stand in-between me and thee. And your handle isn't the same as Frodo's handle, because Frodo is a fictional character. Try as you might, YOU are not a fictional character. Somebody living in 1k. CA disguises himself as Posty. Somebody else in the now freezing northland disguises himself as Bitter Crank.

My alter-ego, Posty McPostface. — Posty McPostface

This is a post from Posty McPostface, right? So are you, Posty McPostface, claiming that Posty McPostface is the alter ego of Posty McPostface? If the theory of the person behind Posty McPostface is correct than that person can't use "my" for anyone else than Posty McPostface. And when I say "you", I'm talking to Posty McPostface, and not that person. Therefore Posty McPostface can't be your alter ego, it's that person's alter ego. However, I have this - perhaps far-fetched - theory that the person whose alter ego is named Posty McPostface slipped and attempted to refer to himself with a first person pronoun, not properly realising that the pronoun must refer to Posty McPostface in a post by Posty McPostface.

This post might be flippant, but I'm actually sincerely curious how you explain usage of first person pronouns in a post where the referent is necessarily ambiguous between proper and alter ego, if the two do not refer to the same real world referent. First person pronouns are not names; they're indexical expressions, and their referent is whoever is uttering them. According to your theory that is... who or what? Who or what do first person pronouns in Posty McPostface's posts refer to, so that the quoted reply above makes sense in the way that we both presumably understand it?

Yes, I realize there is no one named Posty McPostface and Posty McPostface stand in-between me and thee. And your handle isn't the same as Frodo's handle, because Frodo is a fictional character. Try as you might, YOU are not a fictional character. Somebody living in 1k. CA disguises himself as Posty. Somebody else in the now freezing northland disguises himself as Bitter Crank. — Bitter Crank

So, you concede that Posty McPostface is just an empty name for someone disguised as Posty McPostface?

This is a post from Posty McPostface, right? So are you, Posty McPostface, claiming that Posty McPostface is the alter ego of Posty McPostface? — Dawnstorm

Yes, a fictional entity denoted by the name "Posty McPostface" has posted this. I am not the same as Posty McPostface.

Posty McPostface is my alter ego. That claim ties into a direct referant claiming to be who I indeed am.

Hope that wasn't too ambiguous.

And when I say "you", I'm talking to Posty McPostface, and not that person. Therefore Posty McPostface can't be your alter ego, it's that person's alter ego. — Dawnstorm

I follow you here but Posty McPostface is just an alter ego of my true self.

This post might be flippant, but I'm actually sincerely curious how you explain usage of first person pronouns in a post where the referent is necessarily ambiguous between proper and alter ego, if the two do not refer to the same real world referent. First person pronouns are not names; they're indexical expressions, and their referent is whoever is uttering them. According to your theory that is... who or what? Who or what do first person pronouns in Posty McPostface's posts refer to, so that the quoted reply above makes sense in the way that we both presumably understand it? — Dawnstorm

Yes, no disagreements apart from the fact that I am known on these parts by the nick I go by. My usage of "my" is indicative of showing that I identify with my nick. But, again it doesn't denote my true self.

A Liebfrauenmilch (Virgin Mary's Milk) would be good. A sweet sherry? Some people like a sweet, dark vermouth with ice and soda (sparkling water). A sweetish Portuguese Rose? Perhaps a Cask of Amontillado--goes well with roasted Poe. Asti Spumante is a sparkling white italian wine. Good for fast relief, because of the carbonation.

My opinion of dry, tart wines is that nobody actually likes them, but people pretend that dry, sour slop is a sign of sophisticated taste. It isn't. It's a sign of incipient alzheimers. Plus, if you're putting on a reception you don't have to buy as much because nobody will ask for a refill. Now, if you serve a slightly sweet champaign, people will hover around the serving table until they are quite tipsy, or can barely walk.

I generally drink too much at receptions where there is something drinkable and a generous pour, but that's what is required for me to socialize with strangers. I always needed two beers at the bar before I could start chatting up prospective tricks for the night. Two beers, good. Three beers, great. Four beers, divine. Five beers, express to danger zone. Six beers stumbling drunk oblivion. No point in taking me home cuz I won't be able to do anything anyway. So I aimed for four.

So, you concede — Posty McPostface

I concede nothing. A real person is writing your posts.

I wonder... do I even have enough processing power and band width to create and maintain an alter ego? I'm pretty much what you see is what you get.

I concede nothing. A real person is writing your posts. — Bitter Crank

Yes, I'm not arguing over that. What I an arguing is that I'm not the same person as my alter-ego known as Posty McPostface...

I wonder... do I even have enough processing power and band width to create and maintain an alter ego? I'm pretty much what you see is what you get. — Bitter Crank

Are you still a Bitter Crank? No. My musings with you on this forum indicate that you are no longer a bitter crank.

Yes, no disagreements apart from the fact that I am known on these parts by the nick I go by. My usage of "my" is indicative of showing that I identify with my nick. But, again it doesn't denote my true self. — Posty McPostface

But your usage of personal pronouns doesn't differentiate. Neither does mine. I've been Dawnstorm online forever, with only two exceptions, once preceding the name, and another having to do with forum etiquette on that particular forum. I also have a name given to me by my parents, and I share a family name with them. All those names have the same referent (i.e. real world object), and that referent is simply me, not anything as specific as a "true self", which is a good thing, too, since I have no such thing and couldn't be referred to at all. I'm a horrid compartmentaliser: different personae for every social context, even one for when I'm alone in my head. It would be impossible to name my true self. But it's rather easy to name myself - with different names for different context. If someone were to approach me in real life and ask me whether I'm Dawnstorm, I'd be rather surprised. I'd have to ask which Dawnstorm, before answering, too, since it could be a rather strange coincidence, and the other person could have arranged to meet with someone under a code name. In the age of doxing it might be a good idea to walk away instead, though, to be safe. In any case, under the alternat-ego interpretation, "Not right now," might be a possible answer to "Are you Dawnstorm," in that context. Right now, as far as I'm typing, I'm definitely Dawnstorm, though. I'm also still going by my given name, and I'm not using that here. "I" as the origin of first-person experience is the only constant, here. And in the end it doesn't much matter what name I go by. Pleased to meet you. Hope you guessed my name.

My musings with you on this forum indicate that you are no longer a bitter crank. — Posty McPostface

That's because a real person is behind the Bitter Crank conspiracy and the real person changed. A test: If you, or I, were to write under our real names, would we say the same thing? I would, because I don't have an alter ego. What you see is what you get. Is your real self better at wallowing than Posty? Is Posty smarter than you? I doubt it.

I have thought about creating an alter ego, an imaginary Me, who would be quite a bit different than me. Suaver, cleverer, smarter, taller, handsomer, better read, fluent in German and French, more athletic, younger, sexier, etc. But it's very hard to pretend to be smarter than one is. One has to actually have more brains to understand how to be smarter. Until the upgrades come out, I'll just have to put up with as many smarts as I have.

It would be impossible to name my true self. But it's rather easy to name myself - with different names for different context. — Dawnstorm

I think that's what I'm getting at here. I think the point here that I'm making is that contextualism is the only way to go about discerning meaning present in empty names. There really doesn't seem to be any other alternative.

Pleased to meet you too. I'm Posty but not really Posty. Hehe.

A test: If you, or I, were to write under our real names, would we say the same thing? — Bitter Crank

At the very least I would put more effort into my posts if it was under my real name. But since nothing is at stake here for me to wallow or post about depression in my other threads, then it makes little to no difference.

Thanks for the wine suggestions BTW.

Yes, I'm not arguing over that. What I an arguing is that I'm not the same person as my alter-ego known as Posty McPostface... — Posty McPostface

I believe you. I think we switch into a certain mode when we publicly talk about heavy ideas. Even just being polite is a transformation of the interior monologue.

I believe you. I think we switch into a certain mode when we publicly talk about heavy ideas. Even just being polite is a transformation of the interior monologue. — macrosoft

Yes, that's all true. In a figurative sense we only have access to our conscious persona, when in reality we're much more complex than just our day to day conscious aspect of being. Think unconscious, super-ego, ego.

Thanks for the wine suggestions BTW. — Posty McPostface

Bear in mind that I rarely drink wine, so take it with several grains of salt (the advice, not the wine).