I cannot discuss you without utilizing my perceptions of you. — Rich

It's impossible to discuss the moon without discussing both our perception and the linguistic dynamics of our perceptions and representation of the moon. There may be an object preceding those things, but it's impossible for us to access that except through our perception and language, which are greatly linked. — Thanatos Sand

It's impossible to discuss jorndoe without discussing both Thanatos Sand's perception and the linguistic dynamics of Thanatos Sand's perceptions and representation of jorndoe. There may be a jorndoe preceding those things, but it's impossible for Thanatos Sand to access that except through Thanatos Sand's perception and language, which are greatly linked.

Thanks for further showing that "round" is just a linguistic concept dependent on other equally non-materially based linguistic concepts as itself. So, use whatever words you want when you chat about the moon. All you'll be doing is using words, not accurately describing the moon itself. — Thanatos Sand

All you have done is describe the moon after observation.

Now, describe it before observation. — Rich

Thanks for further showing that "round" is just a linguistic concept dependent on other equally non-materially based linguistic concepts as itself. So, use whatever words you want when you chat about the moon. All you'll be doing is using words, not accurately describing the moon itself. — Thanatos Sand

All we know is that the moon is quanta which is essentially nothing. Anything you observe in your life is necessarily the result of the interaction between you, the observer, and the observed quanta. This is absolutely fundamental without any wiggle room. — Rich

All jorndoe knows is that Rich is quanta which is essentially nothing. Anything jorndoe observes in jorndoe's life is necessarily the result of the interaction between jorndoe, and the observed quanta. This is absolutely fundamental without any wiggle room.

And since the moon isn't a smooth-edged orb, it's not actually "round." — Thanatos Sand

The shape of the Moon is largely a result of gravity and composition and whatever, a spheroid within some margin of variation, round. — jorndoe

? — Thorongil

Without the hope of salvation, which religion provides, life is demonstrably not worth living. Your typical atheist, like Dawkins, seems to realize this on some level, but the fact is clearly too much for him to bear, as shown above. — Thorongil

Existence is all over the place? By what particular definition? — Michael Ossipoff

Definitions can be helpful for expressing what we mean when we say something. — Michael Ossipoff

By the way, I’d like to add that, so far as I’m aware of, the words “Real”, and “Exist” aren’t metaphysically-defined. Better to not use them. Of, if I use them, it’s with the understanding that they don’t say anything definite or meaningful. You can define them as you like, and people do. — Michael Ossipoff

if it be nothing, I shall not need spectacles — Gloucester

Suppose there is absolutely nothing. How could something come into existence? — Metaphysician Undercover

it is simply an empirical and logical impossibility that there could be a universe comprising a single entity — Wayfarer

in the absence of observers, our universe is dead — Davies

I was simply observing that it is impossible to conceive of a universe with just one item. 'One' depends on there being 'more than one'. — Wayfarer

[...] politics. I don't expect them to play fair to begin with. — Agustino

I'm a realist — Harry Hindu

If something can exist, then it must exist — Srap Tasmaner

I wonder if the universe were infinite, then wouldn't what is actually possible have to become actual at some point? — Cavacava

Even if we provisionally accept the PSR, it still doesn't logically follow that a cause must have all the properties of its effects (whatever that might even mean). The most that PSR entails in this case is that there must be a cause for any property, which is a plausible (though not necessary) principle if by that we mean that the property is either entailed or made more probable by a prior state of the world combined with dynamical laws. But conservation of properties does not follow from this. — SophistiCat

x is real ⇔ x exists irrespective of anyone's definitions — jorndoe

Invention   Discovery
Definition  Evidence
Quiddity    Existence

I'm the opposite. — Harry Hindu

Whatever is real, does not require our definitions to exist. Rather the opposite, we try to converge on quiddity of whatever is real by means of discovery, something like that. Oftentimes this involves predication. — jorndoe

For a large class of cases — though not for all — in which we employ the word ‘meaning’, it can be explained thus: the meaning of a word is its use in the language. — Wittgenstein

Sixty years after the Holocaust, a new brand of anti-Semitism has reared its ugly head again in Europe. It has the same purpose, but a different face.

How exactly is this abstract cow supposedly related to the cows in the world?
Why should anyone take this hypothesis serious, and ontologize such an abstract cow, anyway...? — jorndoe

[...] Then there's the issue of how things in the world can change but still instantiate a the transcendental Platonic Form. — darthbarracuda