[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, And Rosta wrote: > xod: > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, And Rosta wrote: > > > > > John: > > > > Invent Yourself scripsit: > > > > > > > > > No good! There is only one reality, all others are (equally) unreal > > > > > President McGovern, Irish Socrates, and the one where I drank hot > > > > > chocolate last night are all equally false. The Verification Principle > > > > > shows this > > > > > > > > How? > > > > > > > > You really see no difference between the you-drank-hot-chocolate world > > > > and the 2 + 2 = 5 (or worse yet, 2 + 2 = Albert) worlds, or the world > > > > where all universals are false, or the world where all false statements > > > > are true? > > > > > > I think that's the wrong distinction. Those worlds are impossible, > > > because they violate transuniversal principles (that is, they violate > > > facts that are independent of particular worlds) > > > > > > Oh I see: you *did* mean this distinction, as a response to what xod > > > said. But let me point out for clarity's sake that the potential/imaginary > > > distinction is a distinction among worlds that are not impossible > > > > > > I doubt I can persuade xod to accept any of that, though, except by > > > pointing out that it is an ontology that many people would like to > > > be able to express, even if xod finds it deluded > > > > The world where I drank the cocoa the other night is impossible > > I don't want to stop you and others debating the philosophical > point, but do you at least *understand* the metaphysical model > I was describing? The important thing is that we should be > able to express it in Lojban, like good whorfians, and you > should understand it, but then, even as you declare it linguistically > sound, you, with your philosophical hat on declare it philosophically > bogus. If I remember, it was about declaring certain events impossible (ones that make for bad literature) and others possible (ones that make compelling stories); as opposed to ones that are impossible (did not occur, or cannot, inductively) from possible ones (selected events either unknown and current, or in future). Overeager snippage, from the ancient habit of pandering to the now-empty set of folks still stuck on the slower model modems, makes it difficult to check myself. -- // if (!terrorist) // ignore (); // else collect_data ();