If the existence that is necessary is particular to an instance of time is also saying that there are other instances when it's not, then it would seem to be contingent on the time, yes? No?of which there are only three: a singular instance of time, a succession of times or a permanence in all time. The first is all that is absolutely required of any necessary existence. — Mww
Cool! Both. But then is the logic prescriptive of descriptive? And to be sure, if an effect requires a cause, then if the effect exists or occurs then the cause is strongly implied. But then the effect is contingent on the cause. And the cause appears to be logically contingent on the effect, because the effect is not in-itself necessary. And so on But the bottom line of this, I think, is that the necessity in question is just a logical necessity within a contingent possibility.I’m going with both. It is obviously a logical truism, and because of that, if the existence of a thing is necessary, say, because it is logically a cause of something else, but it it is thought to not exist anyway, or its existence is denied by some other means, a categorical error is committed, insofar as a logical truism is falsified, which is a self-contradiction. — Mww
Would you agree (with me) that this is grounded in contingency? Or at least there's some work to be done to either refine or qualify "necessary existence"?There is one and only one: the thinking subject. If there isn’t one, none of this could be happening, but it is, so...... — Mww
I guess two confuses you, and three - don't forget four and the rest of them. And love justice and The American Way. Superman, unicorns, dragons, all of the English and French kings - they do not exist, do they. These have no existence? Maybe we should pause here: answer: do these exist, yes or no? — tim wood
Is the problem "encounterable"? Let's consider that no one "encounters" anything at all, except mediately through perception and idea. And by that standard, unicorns and their like are more purely existent than any of the furniture of the "real" world, being pure idea undiluted by perception. You really are not making sense. Why is that? — tim wood
If the existence that is necessary is particular to an instance of time is also saying that there are other instances when it's not, then it would seem to be contingent on the time — tim wood
Would you agree (with me) that this is grounded in contingency? Or at least there's some work to be done to either refine or qualify "necessary existence"? — tim wood
I guess you did not read the OP.No they do not exist. In the common usage of the word "exist", which I am familiar with, fictional things do not exist. Nor do love, justice, and other ideas exist. They are conceptual only, and therefore not existing things. — Metaphysician Undercover
I simply rejected "encounterability" as the defining feature of existent, for very good reason which I explained. — Metaphysician Undercover
Short version..... — Mww
I get it - or so I think. (And you thought 180 was dense!)Long version..... — Mww
Of necessarily and ordinarily existing things several question arise. (...) Are they both sub-species of existing things? Is one included in the other? Or is necessary existence a separate genus? — tim wood
In different words, if existing, then existing necessarily. — tim wood
That is, is the world altogether accessible to reason? I'm obliged to think it must be. — tim wood
I'm looking to ordinary language for guidance, and it strikes me that whatever the reality is, either it yield to language, or language to it, and with respect to reality and the real, the reality is prior. — tim wood
I guess you did not read the OP. — tim wood
But this is all useless. Clearly you are unable to take part in the general point of the thread, and you have nothing to offer but that "which I am familiar with." — tim wood
I'm looking to ordinary language for guidance... — tim wood
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.