On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Laura Creighton <l...@openend.se> wrote:
> Incorrect, I think. When I am talking about 'the same 'one' object', > what I mean is not some sort of philosophical one-ness, some Platonic > ideal of one, which like all the numbers, is a singleton, wherever it > occurs in the universe. I mean something much more concrete than > that. > Loved your really explicit and detailed reply there Laura. On a student quiz I'd write "Good and complete answer!". Kirby Footnote to Plato: Not being a Platonist in the sense of nominalist (the two schools are usually counter-posed, but not here), I don't see a need for some "essential meaning" of "oneness". Lots of partially overlapping use cases bearing a family resemblance to one another is sufficient to anchor one's meaning.
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
