speranza, mandaci una cartolina dopo l'esaurimento del deposito di puttanate che inventi. se non ci riesci togliti il tappo dal buco e mettitelo nel cavo orale -----Original Message----- From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx Sent: 18 May 2013 02:29 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Fermat's Conjecture We are considering Fermat's Conjecture. As Palma notes, _he_ would not call it a conjecture. This vis-à-vis a similar claim by McEvoy. "The contradiction [in Frege's system, as discovered by Russell] was there even if no one ever discovered it." Cfr. "Fermat's conjecture would be there even if Fermat had not conjectured it." In a message dated 5/18/2013 6:39:18 A.M. UTC-02, donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx grants the metaphysical status of the claim, and interestingly adds: "The negation of this metaphysical statement is that the contradiction was not there to be discovered prior to its discovery by Russell: if you are defending this position, then that is also a metaphysical claim. It cannot be a criticism of a proposition, as against its negation, that the proposition is 'metaphysical' if its negation is also metaphysical." To further analyse would be whether the metaphysical (untestable) nature of the claim is not furthered stressed (as it is) by the point about this being a case of interaction of an abstraction (item in World 3) as 'having a causal effect' on a World-2 item. Or something like that. But I will re-consider this. Cheers, Speranza --- ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ======= Please find our Email Disclaimer here-->: http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer ======= ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html