SWM wrote: >>Joseph Polanik wrote: >>>>SWM wrote: >>>>>Joseph Polanik wrote: >>>>>>the meaning of 'identity' that is consistent with the is of >>>>>>constitution (and, often, with claims of constitution not using >>>>>>'is') is not identical to the meaning of 'identity' that is >>>>>>consistent with Leibniz's Law. >>>>>That's certainly true but the idea of "conceptually true" is >>>>>dependent on the notion of logical identity (a thing is the same as >>>>>itself). >>>>what is the basis of your claim that "the idea of 'conceptually >>>>true' is dependent on the notion of logical identity"? >>Some good places to start: >>http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_conceptual_truth >>A conceptual truth is one that is true by definition. That a bachelor >>is an unmarried male is a conceptual truth. >>http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/1303/Conceptual.pdf >>"How do we know that vixens are female foxes? Such questions tend to >>receive short shrift. We are told that it is a conceptual truth that >>vixens are female foxes, or that it is conceptually impossible for >>something to be a vixen without being a female fox, or that being a >>vixen has conceptual connections to being female and being a fox. In >>unfashionable terminology, `Vixens are female foxes' is said to be >>analytic. both these sources are using 'conceptual truth' to mean 'analytical truth' --- 'true by definition'. are you claiming that Searle is claiming that 'syntax does not constitute semantics' is analytically true? here is a better place to start your research into what is meant by conceptual analysis: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concepts/ -- Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware @^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@ http://what-am-i.net @^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@ ========================================== Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/