I've read lots of philosophy, but only found one piece of REAL wisdom: Semantic realism cannot be reconciled with counterfactual statements.
Show this thread
You must either abandon a strong correspondence theory of truth, admit absurdities into your ontology, or say much of language is nonsense.
-
-
Stick to less controversial topics like seizing the means of production.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Okay. Much of language is nonsense.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Counterfactuals are real - real possibilities, not actualities. Nothing absurd about that. Possibilities = forms; language refers to them.
-
Btw, what about counterfactuals about the past? Are past possibilities also real or did they cease to exist when they became impossible?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Using Language to say 'Language is Nonsense' is an ontological topic in itself.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
One vote for "admit absurdities".
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The latter. Every time.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
modalism fixes everything! At least in a subset of possibilia... not sure if the actual world is in it.
-
Then I got a nice true counterfactual for you to explain: If modalism were wrong, you would be wrong.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.