[lit-ideas] t-ideas] Re: ...the collapse of distinctions is rhetoric, but whose?

  • From: Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 07:31:13 +0000

The confusion persists. Consider mr.eric.yost so called problem: if the 
Schroedinger equation mean one thing und so weiter.
Nobody cares except idiots in philosophy about meaning (if anything the very 
notion of {meaning} is confused.)
The claim under discussion is this: 
1. there are identity statements
2. some of them are false and some of them are true.
2.1 if you are really pedantic you may have the partition to be non exclusive
3. in the case & solely in the case of true identity statements, such 
statements are necessarily true.

Following mr.eric.yost's demands nothing is said about anyone knowing, 
choosing, selecting or what not. Such activities, that appear to be restricted 
to cognitive systems, and only of some of the rather sophisticated ones, have 
nothing to do with identities, when, to reiterate, the statements expressing 
such identities are true.
If there were any need to discuss more, please indicate which of the point 1, 
2, and 3 is false.

Regards


-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Eric 
Sent: 30 September 2014 23:51
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: ...the collapse of distinctions is rhetoric, but whose?

>>As for the question posed by "eric" the symphony si the symphony, which 
>>ontology eric likes is utterly irrelevant, if eric think it is identical with 
>>a performance that is one of the possible choices, that, to reiterate, makes 
>>no difference to the truth of identity statements.

This seem to be the nub of our disagreement: the "truth of identity 
statements." In the example of the DS Tenth Symphony, I agree that my personal 
choice is irrelevant. However, the simultaneity of multiple true identity 
statements has not been addressed.

Cases in which, for example, the Schrödinger equation truly mean one thing, 
i.e., the Schrödinger equation IS a description of the form of probability 
waves for small particles--such cases--are a very small subset of identity 
statements, which if true are a sampling of eternal verities.

However, in everyday life, we encounter simultaneous multiple true identity 
statements. While not equations or any sort  of mathematical statements, these 
multiple true identity statements are part of the natural world, as real as an 
abstraction like Platonic solids, and candidates for philosophical discussion.

Additionally, there is no way to defend the meaning of one identity statement 
over another. If you think DS's Tenth is the score and I think it is any 
particular performance of the score, there is no way to prove one or the other 
is solely correct. 

Except by beginning with a consensual definition, a definition which carries an 
almost tautological argument for one identity or another. Perhaps I am 
exceptionally dense, but I do not understand the significance of discussing 
identities without definitions.

Eric



------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest 
on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: