[Wittrs] Sense of "Is"
- From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:47:22 -0500
jrstern wrote:
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Joseph Polanik <jPolanik@...> wrote:
Kant said that being is not a 'real' predicate, which in Kantian
jargon means a predicate that adds determinations to the subject.
'being' remains a logical predicate --- it is a 'real' (in the
sense of genuine) predicate but not a 'real' (in the sense of
determining) predicate.
As to exactly what Kant did or didn't say about "is", or the German
equivalent, I will have to trust y'all.
But your example here shows two different games in which it can be
used. One is an ontological game, the other is a linguistic game.
how are these language games different.
It explains why one might want to use "to be" predicates for,
say, unicorns - or existential predicates, at all.
Is "is" the same word, across games?
it's the same word across the millennia. from sum to am. from est to is.
Joe
--
Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
==========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
