But that says nothing. And shows less. — Banno
Being need merely be; — Ciceronianus
his role is obfuscation rather than clarification — Banno
where he talks of being as a sort of standing forth, as putting the pieces on the
table, he is saying no more than Frege and others — Banno
If he is saying no more than that things come into existence and cease to exist, then we would all agree, and puzzle over why he phrased something so simple in such a constipated fashion. — Banno
However, in fairness, I do think that on certain occasions his way of speaking about things is unique and special, in a sense that I can't explain if pressed.
In general the pragmatists do a better job, I think, though Joshs will very much disagree. — Manuel
The point being that yes, he often complicates things without needing to do so. — Manuel
In general the pragmatists do a better job, I think, though Joshs will very much disagree. — Manuel
This by way of objecting to treating being as the name of something. — Banno
They called Rorty a Pragmatist as well as Quine. I don't think Peirce or Dewey would've agreed with that. Not sure about James in this case. — Manuel
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.