No, space isn't something separate from locations, separate from extensional relations. It's identical to them. The orbit between the orbit of Venus and Mars is where the Earth is located, that's its location. It's not located "in" something else that's akin to a container.

That’s pure assertion, I’d say. Even accepting all that, the question remains: Where are locations? Locations have a location, sure, but where?

Correct, they're not going to be identical, but they can be as similar as, say, two copies of a music CD. — Terrapin Station

This is what happens when meaning is thought of as mental furniture.

Instead, think of meaning as what happens when words are used; the meaning is not in @Terrapin Station's head, nor is it in @frank's head; rather it is in the conversation and the ensuing comments.

Meaning is shared, not private.

All reports/accounts of thought are propositional. That is, all thinking about thought is propositional. Not all thought is thinking about thought. There is a distinction to be drawn between reports/accounts of thought, and what's being reported upon and/or accounted for. There are remarkable differences concerning existential dependency and elemental constituency.

All reports/accounts of thought is propositional. — creativesoul

Here's a report on the bombing of Guernica...

All reports/accounts, including but not limited to those of thought, are propositional.

Better?

:wink:

Thought includes:...
Are propositions or the propositional form an aspect of this? Is yes, how? As an oject of some action?
If no, then how do you invision thought? — frank

Propositions are verbal.
Thoughts may be verbal and/or non-verbal. (Paivio, 2007)

Paivio, Allan Urho. 2007. Mind and its Evolution: A Dual Coding Theoretical Approach. Mahwah, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

That’s pure assertion, I’d say. Even accepting all that, the question remains: Where are locations? Locations have a location, sure, but where? — AJJ

"Pure assertion" as opposed to?

At this point, you should be able to answer these questions as I would. That doesn't imply that you'd agree with me, but you should be capable of understanding my view so that you could answer as I would.

Locations are the answer to where. When you answer where something is, you give a location. So the "where" of any location is the location in question. Locations are given relatively, as I've explained.

As opposed to argument or observation. What I observe about locations is they exist within a unified space (a thing is here relative to a thing over there, with here and there being parts of space). All you’re doing is refusing to make that observation and insisting it’s not the case.

I’ve noticed there’s a specific thread about this anyway so should post there about this instead.

As opposed to argument or observation. — AJJ

Are you suggesting that you or anyone else is presenting arguments or observations? Just curious.

What I observe about locations is they exist within a unified space — AJJ

You've got to be joking. You observe "unified space"? Can you point to what you're looking at?

with here and there being parts of space) — AJJ

Explain how you're observing that "here and there are parts of space," please.