> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 18:38:23 +0200
> From: tor...@dsv.su.se
> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: The seven step-Mathematical preliminaries
>
>
> Jesse Mazer skrev:
>>
>>
>>> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 21:17:03 +0200
>>> From: tor...@dsv.su.se
>>> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>>> Subject: Re: The seven step-Mathematical preliminaries
>>>
>>> My philosophical argument is about the mening of the word "all". To be
>>> able to use that word, you must associate it with a value set.
>>
>> What's a "value set"? And why do you say we "must" associate it in
>> this way? Do you have a philosophical argument for this "must", or is
>> it just an edict that reflects your personal aesthetic preferences?
>>
>>> Mostly that set is "all objects in the universe", and if you stay
>> inside the
>>> universe, there is no problems.
>>
>> *I* certainly don't define numbers in terms of any specific mapping
>> between numbers and objects in the universe, it seems like a rather
>> strange notion--shall we have arguments over whether the number 113485
>> should be associated with this specific shoelace or this specific
>> kangaroo?
>
> When I talk about "universe" here, I do not mean our physical universe.
> What I mean is something that can be called "everything". It includes
> all objects in our physical universe, as well as all symbols and all
> words and all numbers and all sets and all other universes. It includes
> everything you can use the word "all" about.
>
> For you to be able to use the word "all", you must define the "domain"
> of that word. If you do not define the domain, then it will be
> impossible for me and all other humans to understand what you are
> talking about.
OK, so how do you say I should define this type of "universe"? Unless you are
demanding that I actually give you a list which spells out every symbol-string
that qualifies as a member, can't I simply provide an abstract *rule* that
would allow someone to determine in principle if a particular symbol-string
they are given qualifies? Or do you have a third alternative besides spelling
out every member or giving an abstract rule?
Jesse
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
