A phenomenalist says that all there is, is properties. — frank
Properties are unique physical things. — Terrapin Station
It's the other way around.So we've already been through that language isn't just information transfer, — fdrake
One thing I brought up in another thread about this is that we could say that two things "match" when they're structurally similar--for example, two shirts that we'd loosely call "the same shirt."
But when we're talking about the correlation between a proposition and a state of affairs, surely we're not saying that they're similar in that way, are we? (And beside that, extramentally, we have nothing to make a determination that they're similar.)
With the DNA example you use, we're talking about a physical process that manipulates materials in a particular way. If we're proposing this for a way that correspondence can work when it comes to something like truth value, what analogous (to DNA) physical process are we talking about? — Terrapin Station
I cannot overlook the backdoor smuggling of agency when there is none warranted. All talk about information being within cells, rna, dna, etc. dubiously presupposes meaning where there is no creature/agent capable of drawing correlations between different things. — creativesoul
The issue is "meaning". I think there is far more meaning in two extremely complex things like DNA which happen to match, than there is in the correlation between a proposition and a state of affairs. In comparison, the correlation between a proposition and a state of affairs is extremely simplistic, while the correlation between replicated DNA is extremely complex. Don't you think that the complex correlation is far more meaningful than the simplistic correlation? — Metaphysician Undercover
The issue is "meaning". I think there is far more meaning in two extremely complex things like DNA which happen to match, than there is in the correlation between a proposition and a state of affairs. In comparison, the correlation between a proposition and a state of affairs is extremely simplistic, while the correlation between replicated DNA is extremely complex. Don't you think that the complex correlation is far more meaningful than the simplistic correlation? — Metaphysician Undercover
I am guessing that few here would say that Google translation understands the meaning of the texts it uses. It works on information at the level of syntax. — Banno
That's all that is needed for moving information about. Using language is far more than that, which again shows the poverty of the conduit model.
Language is not moving information about. — Banno
(4) Is there one all-encompassing game (or potential-game) all other games can be (in principle) translated into? — csalisbury
to integrate it into an existing set of correlations, — Possibility
I think this trail eventually opens up to contradiction. To continue on, you probably need to adopt a little anti-realism, which can just manifest as not knowing. You know? — frank
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.