On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 10:27:35 PM UTC+1 Brent wrote:
> > > On 3/11/2021 9:44 AM, Tomas Pales wrote: > > > > On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 1:26:27 AM UTC+1 Bruce wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:52 AM Tomas Pales <litew...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> If there is a contradiction in the definition of an object, that means >>> that the law of identity is violated and the object is not identical to >>> itself and hence is not possible. There is no difference between possible >>> and necessary in the absolute sense because every possible object exists >>> necessarily in reality as a whole. >>> >> >> >> That is known as 'begging the question' in that you have assumed the >> result that it is necessary for you to prove. In other words, you have a >> circular argument. >> > > I don't have much of an argument for claiming that there is no difference > between possible and "real" existence. I just can't even imagine any > fundamental difference, I don't know what it would even mean. > > > Is there a dog in your room? Is it possible for a dog to be in your > room? Do you understand those two questions? > Sure. And these are the answers: There is no dog in my room at this moment. It is impossible for a dog to be in my room at this moment. Why is it impossible? Because it would be a contradiction if a dog was in a room where it is not. Like I said in a similar example, it might be possible in a different world but not in this one. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/163c15eb-46f7-46ff-95f1-ca1dd6e540a1n%40googlegroups.com.
