>> How are they like either of these or are you just being funny?
The joy of greeting a loved one depends upon there being loved ones but I
don't see how laws of physics depend upon this; also, they apply
whether we
see something beautiful etc. or not. I must confess that I am not
sure what
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Actually e=mc2 states nothing about light, although it uses c, the velocity
> of light,
Yes yes but the accuracy of my ad hoc physics is not to the point here.
Substitute any law and the 'object' it refers to.
Carrol
various persuasions dealt with this issue. Quine seems most radical and
relativistic on issues of what there is. Cheers, Ken Hanly
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2000 10:38 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:1370
In a message dated 9/7/00 12:04:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< I don't think you and I are in any real disagreement on this. "Laws
*state*."
"e=mc2" *states* something about light, but were minds not around to
make the statement light would do just fine by itself. >
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> laws state actual natural necessities
> in this owrld such that, in virtue of the causal structure of something,
> something else must occur in certain given circumstances. It's a complex
> topic.
I don't think you and I are in any real disagreement on this. "Laws *
In a message dated 9/6/00 9:07:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< Laws of course only exist in thought (except for pure Platonists,
who believe that forms or ideas are more real than the actualities
they refer to or describe). What exists outside of thought are the
thin
In a message dated 9/6/00 8:54:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< I guess if you follow Berkeley chairs
and tables are ideas so they are certainly like them if they are like ideas!
Are you talking about the question whether some "entities" in theoretical
physics actual
Laws of course only exist in thought (except for pure Platonists,
who believe that forms or ideas are more real than the actualities
they refer to or describe). What exists outside of thought are the
things in motion that the "laws" describe. "E=Mc2" is a thought,
though it is a thought through wh
How are they like either of these or are you just being funny?
The joy of greeting a loved one depends upon there being loved ones but I
don't see how laws of physics depend upon this; also, they apply whether we
see something beautiful etc. or not. I must confess that I am not sure what
you are t
>
> Okay, so I've revealed myself as an amateur, self-educated, philosopher,
> since I confused metaphysical realism with epistemological realism.
>
> Though it may not be compatible with the received definition of
> "epistemological realism," I would amend the above to say that
> "ideas/theories
10 matches
Mail list logo