Another philosophy arises from the C pointer concept where we could
state that x and y are both pointers to the same object, however you
would have to restate the rule below to correctly note that it is the
object that x and y refer to that is the same, not x and y themselves. (01)
Duane (02)
Duane (03)
Duane Nickull wrote: (04)
>
>
> Chris Menzel wrote:
>
>> ID: if x = y, then anything true of x is true of y.
>>
> Disagree. Most things may be the same but it is still instance y as
> opposed to instance x, therefore his axiom has a logic error. They
> are still two different things. It may be better to state:
>
> if x = y, then x is y and both should be called x.
>
>
> Also - an important consideration of context is perceiver. To you and
> I, a coffee table is a solid item, to a neutrino, it is a lot of open
> space interspersed with a few bits of solid matter (even that is now
> up for debate - Holographic Universe; Michael Talbot, ISBN 0060922583).
>
> Perception is everything in context. Who is the experiencer?
>
> Duane
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post:
> mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (05)
|