ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] electric sheep

To: Ingvar Johansson <ingvar.johansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Avril Styrman <Avril.Styrman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 19:21:32 +0200
Message-id: <1194801692.47373a1c5f7b0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Let the discussion be continued off-line.     (01)

Avril    (02)

Lainaus Ingvar Johansson <ingvar.johansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:    (03)

> Avril Styrman schrieb:
> > Ingvar wrote:
> >   
> >> 2. Armstrong thinks that there are no determinables, only
> determinates; 
> >> I think both are needed in order to make sense of mathematical
> physics. 
> >> That is, determinates (quantity values) exist only as 
> >> determinates-of-a-determinable (determinable = quantity dimension).
> >>     
> >
> > And this partly overlaps with your first point. 
> 
> No, the problem (i) whether it is possible to reduce determinable 
> properties to determinate properties is (at least to my mind) quite 
> distinct from the problem (ii) whether it is possible to reduce 
> substance universals to property universals. Neither is it identical 
> with (iii) the problem below of how to individuate instances of property
> 
> determinates. Any reduction of determinable properties (such as length, 
> 
> mass, and electric charge) to determinate properties (such as 2.03 m 
> long, 5.67 kg mass, and 7.12 coulomb electric charge) must be able to 
> explain why it makes sense to add determinate lengths (or masses, or 
> electric charges)  to each other, and why it does not make sense to add 
> determinates of different determinables (quantity dimensions) to each 
> other. Examples: 2.03 m + 5.67 m + 7.12 m = 14.82 m; 2.03 kg + 5.67 kg +
> 
> 7.12 kg = 14.82 kg; and 2.03 c + 5.67 c + 7.12 c = 14.82 c. But: 2.03 m 
> + 5.67 kg + 7.12 c = 14.82 ???
> 
> > The problems with e.g. an
> > absolutely determinate shade of red are clear. Consider that you have a
> red
> > car. The door of the car is red, but still there must be some
> variation,
> >   
> 
> Yes, but it must be a variation of the same determinable: *perceived* 
> color (which should be kept distinct from color in the sense of 
> frequency of electromagnetic radiation).
> 
> > even though very little, in the shades of red of different parts of
> the
> > door. Just how small can be the smallest possible coloured part?
> 
> As small as the smallest colored part that you are able to perceive, I 
> would say.
> 
> Best,
> Ingvar
> 
> 
> 
>     (04)


-- 
Always forward towards the supreme maxim of scientific philosophizing    (05)

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (06)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>