- #1
drunkenfool
- 29
- 0
Hello, here's a question. Looking for insights. More to do with the Platonist / Naturalist divide, but not necessarily limited to that.
So... Are there propositions?
So... Are there propositions?
Do you say this assuming that a definition is itself a proposition? It surely isn't true in general that if a definition of X exists, X exists- unless we have different ideas of what a definition is.HallsofIvy said:Define "proposition". If you can, then they exist!
RoboSapien said:Yes they do exist. I am the proof of it. I am predisposed to be right on most of the topics compared to HomoSapiens.
drunkenfool said:do propositions tangibly exist? do they represent some sort of metaphysical certainty? or are they merely concepts employed to help us communicate?
I would put the most emphasis on the process of abstraction. I think Platonic Forms exist as concepts, specifically, as the ultimate abstractions, the most general generalities, but I don't see any reason to think they are anything more.selfAdjoint said:Relationships between things exist in the universe. Selecting and relating them to each other is the work of minds. But minds can also invent relationships that are not between outer things, but between thoughts. So the answer is both: people may discover whether the geometry of space is euclidean or not, but they may also discover there is a principle bundle over spacetime with such-and-such a group, not something the intrepid cosmo/astro-naut will ever encounter.
That's funny. I would count writing and speech as tangible forms. For some reason, I think specifically of copyright laws that require a creative work to be in tangible form in order to be eligible for copyright protection. Here, written or spoken (recorded) form is tangible. Perhaps you're being clever and making a distinction between a proposition and one of its tangible forms.?Tom Mattson said:They don't tangibly exist.
honestrosewater said:Someone just started a similar discussion in the Philosophy of Science and Mathematics forum, and we've had the discussion there before; selfAdjoint pretty much gave my answer.
I would put the most emphasis on the process of abstraction. I think Platonic Forms exist as concepts, specifically, as the ultimate abstractions, the most general generalities, but I don't see any reason to think they are anything more.
honestrosewater said:That's funny. I would count writing and speech as tangible forms. For some reason, I think specifically of copyright laws that require a creative work to be in tangible form in order to be eligible for copyright protection. Here, written or spoken (recorded) form is tangible.
Perhaps you're being clever and making a distinction between a proposition and one of its tangible forms.?
A sentence--any kind of sentence--can be used to convey meaning. However, the sentence is not itself the meaning. Strictly speaking, a sentence is a physical entity--a collection of ink marks on a page, or a series of sound waves traveling through the air--and it is also a linguistic entity--a collection of letters or words, organized according to some grammatical or other formal principle.
A statement is not a sentence, nor is it a kind of sentence. Rather it is that which can be expressed by a sentence--an assertion, a description, or a piece of information. It is that of which it makes sense to say that it is true or false. We shall treat the term 'statement' as being synonymous, and therefore properly interchangeable, with the term 'proposition'.
How so? I am speaking of abstraction as a thought process.drunkenfool said:In terms of abstraction etc. I take a very materialistic view to this.
Eh, I'm sleep deprived myself, but that's nothing new. :yuck:im sorry if the above isn't particularly coherent. but alas, it is late and I'm just a drunken fool :P.
Okay, I should have made those distinctions earlier. But a proposition still contains information and so would, in some sense, be tangible, no?Tom Mattson said:So do I, but I don't consider "propositions" to be identical to any subset of either writing or speech. In my usage, propositions are that which are conveyed by physical means, not the physical means themselves.
It's not me, it's my logic book. I learned the subject from Logic by Robert Baum, and so I use his definitions, which are...
and...
honestrosewater said:Okay, I should have made those distinctions earlier. But a proposition still contains information and so would, in some sense, be tangible, no?
This is a hotly debated question in the field of philosophy and linguistics. Some argue that propositions are real entities that exist independently of human thought, while others argue that propositions are simply abstract concepts created by language. There is no definitive answer, as it ultimately depends on one's philosophical beliefs.
No, propositions cannot be proven or disproven in the same way that scientific theories can be. This is because propositions are not testable in the physical world. They are abstract concepts that are used to convey meaning and information.
Propositions and beliefs are closely related, but they are not the same thing. A proposition is a statement or claim that can be either true or false, while a belief is a mental attitude towards that proposition. In other words, a belief is a person's acceptance or rejection of a proposition.
Yes, propositions can change over time. This can happen through the introduction of new evidence or information that may lead to a different interpretation of the proposition. Additionally, as language evolves and meanings of words shift, the same proposition may be interpreted differently over time.
This is another heavily debated question, and the answer ultimately depends on one's philosophical beliefs. Some argue that propositions are universal and apply to all people and situations, while others argue that propositions are subjective and can vary based on individual perspectives and contexts.