[C] [Wittrs] Digest Number 309

Title: WittrsAMR

Messages In This Digest (9 Messages)

1.
[quickphilosophy] An Ontological Prop in the 3's From: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
2a.
testing message board From: Sean Wilson
2b.
Re: testing message board From: Sean Wilson
2c.
Re: testing message board From: Sean Wilson
2d.
Re: testing message board From: Sean Wilson
2e.
Re: testing message board From: Sean Wilson
2f.
Re: testing message board From: Sean Wilson
2g.
Re: testing message board From: Sean Wilson
3a.
Re: "Propositions are Pictures" From: Rajasekhar Goteti

Messages

1.

[quickphilosophy] An Ontological Prop in the 3's

Posted by: "wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:48 pm (PDT)





3.328 If a sign is not used then it is meaningless. That is the point [Sinn] of

Occam's razor. (If everything behaves as if a sign had meaning, then it has
meaning.)

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But this remains to me a
highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the extent that one holds a theory of
simple names of the sort W expounds in TLP, you can tell what your ontology must

do to satisfy Occam's Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that
(really) exist are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a
complete list of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objects—and nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a single example
of an object.

It's a pretty theory, nevertheless. "There's a cat on the mat" will still make
sense, even if it's there's no cat on the mat in question. But, on W's view,
"Axelrod is on the mat" will be nonsense if "Axelrod" is a simple name but there

is no Axelrod. So, "the cat" will make the cut only if it's identical to some
Axelrod or other.

Compare Quine, who says in "On What There Is" that to the extent that the
made-up "socratizes" can be used to dispense with all sentences containing the
name "Socrates" we need not count Socrates as one of the indispensable elements
of the universe. The problem with this version of Quine's thesis, as Alston
pointed out in "Ontological Commitment," if the analyses and analysanda are true

in just the same cases, whatever one is committed to the other would seem to be
as well. But Alston's argument won't work against the tractarian view, I don't
think, because, for W, the sentence itself displays its commitments by showing
which of its elements are simple names (those that are senseless if they don't
refer). If "Socrates" is a real name, "Socrates is F" doesn't seem to be well
paraphrased by "There's an X such that X socratizes, X if F, and for all Y if Y
socratizes then Y = X" because it is simply a denial that "Socrates is F" is
atomic.

Put it this way: Let "S is F" stand for a prop. If it is paraphrasable in the
manner described above, it is NOT an atomic prop. But, using Quine's trick, any

prop may be so paraphrased. Therefore, either there are no atomic props or the
paraphrase does not work.. But W spends a good chunk of time and trouble
attempting to prove that there MUST be atomic props (though he can't or won't
give us any examples of them). If he has succeeded, then we know that Quine's
trick is defective.

What seems so paradoxical about W's ontological scheme here is that, rather than

pointing to science as the arbiter of what there is, he points to meaning. He
claims that the very possibility of determinate statements/understa nding
requires that there be atomic props. But how will we tell which props are
atomic?? As I've said before, one of the attractive things about the Tractatus
is that it is so audacious.

Walto

2a.

testing message board

Posted by: "Sean Wilson" whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx   whoooo26505

Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:37 pm (PDT)



Running a test on the message board to see if the new anti-word wrap feature
will work. I need a long string to test this, so here it goes:

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But
this remains to me a highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the
extent that one holds a theory of simple names of the sort W expounds in
TLP, you can tell what your ontology must do to satisfy Occam's
Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that (really) exist
are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a complete list
of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objectsand nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a
single example of an object.


Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

2b.

Re: testing message board

Posted by: "Sean Wilson" whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx   whoooo26505

Thu Jul 29, 2010 3:56 pm (PDT)



Test numero dos

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 5:36:51 PM
Subject: testing message board

Running a test on the message board to see if the new anti-word wrap feature
will work. I need a long string to test this, so here it goes:

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But
this remains to me a highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the
extent that one holds a theory of simple names of the sort W expounds in
TLP, you can tell what your ontology must do to satisfy Occam's
Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that (really) exist
are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a complete list
of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objectsand nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a
single example of an object.

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

2c.

Re: testing message board

Posted by: "Sean Wilson" whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx   whoooo26505

Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:08 pm (PDT)



The second test of the new anti-wrap regex _expression_ is successful!!!

http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&goto=5325&S=68367173198d9fd9116eb5a2c7ac0d62#msg_5325

Woo hoo!

There still are a few bugs. It destroys the signature line. We're looking at
modifications, houston.

No more will any of our members be confined to half a box!

SW

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 6:56:24 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

Test numero dos

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 5:36:51 PM
Subject: testing message board

Running a test on the message board to see if the new anti-word wrap feature
will work. I need a long string to test this, so here it goes:

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But
this remains to me a highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the
extent that one holds a theory of simple names of the sort W expounds in
TLP, you can tell what your ontology must do to satisfy Occam's
Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that (really) exist
are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a complete list
of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objectsand nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a
single example of an object.

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

2d.

Re: testing message board

Posted by: "Sean Wilson" whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx   whoooo26505

Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:27 pm (PDT)



Testing again. Trying to make the replacement string nothing but one blank
space.


----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 7:06:58 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

The second test of the new anti-wrap regex _expression_ is successful!!!

http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&goto=5325&S=68367173198d9fd9116eb5a2c7ac0d62#msg_5325

Woo hoo!

There still are a few bugs. It destroys the signature line. We're looking at
modifications, houston.

No more will any of our members be confined to half a box!

SW

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 6:56:24 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

Test numero dos

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 5:36:51 PM
Subject: testing message board

Running a test on the message board to see if the new anti-word wrap feature
will work. I need a long string to test this, so here it goes:

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But
this remains to me a highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the
extent that one holds a theory of simple names of the sort W expounds in
TLP, you can tell what your ontology must do to satisfy Occam's
Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that (really) exist
are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a complete list
of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objectsand nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a
single example of an object.

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

2e.

Re: testing message board

Posted by: "Sean Wilson" whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx   whoooo26505

Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:42 pm (PDT)



OK! After having another successful test, we now go for the jugular. Can I
eliminate word wrap, allowing all messages to fill their container on the
message board, while NOT destroying the signature line -- all in one damn regex.
Your Evil Knievel moment awaits ....

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 7:27:03 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

Testing again. Trying to make the replacement string nothing but one blank
space.

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 7:06:58 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

The second test of the new anti-wrap regex _expression_ is successful!!!

http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&goto=5325&S=68367173198d9fd9116eb5a2c7ac0d62#msg_5325

Woo hoo!

There still are a few bugs. It destroys the signature line. We're looking at
modifications, houston.

No more will any of our members be confined to half a box!

SW

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 6:56:24 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

Test numero dos

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 5:36:51 PM
Subject: testing message board

Running a test on the message board to see if the new anti-word wrap feature
will work. I need a long string to test this, so here it goes:

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But
this remains to me a highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the
extent that one holds a theory of simple names of the sort W expounds in
TLP, you can tell what your ontology must do to satisfy Occam's
Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that (really) exist
are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a complete list
of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objectsand nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a
single example of an object.

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

2f.

Re: testing message board

Posted by: "Sean Wilson" whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx   whoooo26505

Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:56 pm (PDT)



Not too bad. Adjusting something here.


Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 7:42:01 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

OK! After having another successful test, we now go for the jugular. Can I
eliminate word wrap, allowing all messages to fill their container on the
message board, while NOT destroying the signature line -- all in one damn regex.

Your Evil Knievel moment awaits ....

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 5:36:51 PM
Subject: testing message board

Running a test on the message board to see if the new anti-word wrap feature
will work. I need a long string to test this, so here it goes:

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But
this remains to me a highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the
extent that one holds a theory of simple names of the sort W expounds in
TLP, you can tell what your ontology must do to satisfy Occam's
Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that (really) exist
are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a complete list
of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objectsand nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a
single example of an object.

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

2g.

Re: testing message board

Posted by: "Sean Wilson" whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx   whoooo26505

Thu Jul 29, 2010 5:03 pm (PDT)



Success, success!

Houston, we have achieved our dual goal of a full message box with no mangling
of the signature.

http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=2750&start=0&S=68367173198d9fd9116eb5a2c7ac0d62

There is, indeed, a chicken for every pot.

(This ends all tests for today)

SW

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 7:42:01 PM
Subject: Re: testing message board

OK! After having another successful test, we now go for the jugular. Can I
eliminate word wrap, allowing all messages to fill their container on the
message board, while NOT destroying the signature line -- all in one damn regex.

Your Evil Knievel moment awaits ....

----- Original Message ----
From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com>
To: wittrsamr@freelists.org
Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 5:36:51 PM
Subject: testing message board

Running a test on the message board to see if the new anti-word wrap feature
will work. I need a long string to test this, so here it goes:

I take it the "meaning" above means "reference." But
this remains to me a highly cryptic prop.. I do think that to the
extent that one holds a theory of simple names of the sort W expounds in
TLP, you can tell what your ontology must do to satisfy Occam's
Razor. You will need to insist that the only things that (really) exist
are those that are named (by simple names). So, to give a complete list
of "what there is" one must supply a list of all the nameable
objectsand nothing else. The problem is that W doesn't give a
single example of an object.

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
(Subscribe: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/sworg-subscribe/ )
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
New Discussion Groups! http://ludwig.squarespace.com/discussionfora/

==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

3a.

Re: "Propositions are Pictures"

Posted by: "Rajasekhar Goteti" wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:56 pm (PDT)



Virtual reality and its impact.

There has been increasing interest in the potential social impact of new technologies, such as virtual reality (as may be seen in utopian literature, within the social sciences, and in popular culture). Mychilo S. Cline, in his book, Power, Madness, and Immortality: The Future of Virtual Reality, published in 2005, argues that virtual reality will lead to a number of important changes in human life and activity. He argues that:Virtual reality will be integrated into daily life and activity and will be used in various human ways.Techniques will be developed to influence human behavior, interpersonal communication, and cognition (i.e., virtual genetics).[6]As we spend more and more time in virtual space, there will be a gradual “migration to virtual space,” resulting in important changes in economics, worldview, and culture.[7]The design of virtual environments may be used to extend basic human rights into virtual space, to promote human freedom
and well-being, and to promote social stability as we move from one stage in socio-political development to the next.ImplementationTo develop a real time virtual environment, a computer graphics library can be used as embedded resource coupled with a common programming language, such as C++, Perl, Java or Python. Some of the most popular computer graphics library/API/language are OpenGL, Direct3D, Java3D and VRML, and their use will be directly influenced by the system demands in terms of performance, program purpose, and hardware platform. The use of multithreading (e.g. Posix) can also accelerate 3D performance and enable cluster computing with multi-userinteractivity.
WIKIFULL
So the propositions are picturessekhar

Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Yahoo! News

Odd News

You won't believe

it, but it's true

Stay on top

of your group

activity with

Yahoo! Toolbar

Yahoo! Groups

Mental Health Zone

Bi-polar disorder

Find support

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web

Other related posts:

  • » [C] [Wittrs] Digest Number 309 - WittrsAMR