To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Thomas Johnston <tmj44p@xxxxxxx> |
Date: | Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:24:06 +0000 (UTC) |
Message-id: | <2078129852.7412446.1430238246845.JavaMail.yahoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
I just spent an hour trying to write a clear and informative response to Ed. I should have read John's reply first. On Monday, April 27, 2015 6:09 PM, John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Ed, Those issues have been debated for centuries, and attempts to use modern logic have left them as confused as ever. EJB > “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are > dreamt of in your philosophy”, he is only saying that his > personal UoD for reasoning about observed events includes things > that Horatio’s colder realism does not. Alonzo Church and Willard Van Orman Quine are two logician- philosophers who were well versed in modern logic and science. Quine was a strict nominalist who tried to get rid of abstract entities. Church was a "realist" (in the Scholastic sense) who made a strong case for admitting them into the UoD, the scientific realm, and everyday "common sense". I cited Church's article about the ontological status of women and abstract entities, which he presented at Harvard in order to annoy Quine: http://www.jfsowa.com/ontology/church.htm The article is humorous, but deadly serious. Excerpts: AC > Quine and Goodman emphasize the economy of nominalism in supposing > the existence of fewer entities. But the economy which has commonly > been the concern of the logician, and of the mathematician dealing > with foundations, has been simply economy of assumption... > Surely there are other criteria by which to judge a theory. > > To return to Quine and Goodman, it is possible, even likely, that > the failure of their program will demonstrate the untenability of > their finitistic nominalism... Following is an article in which I cite and discuss some of those other criteria, which cannot even be stated in a Quinean framework: http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/signproc.htm For a summary of the criticisms (with over 3 dozen references), see Section 2, "A Static, Lifeless, Purposeless World." John _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Watch out Watson: Here comes Amazon Machine Learning - ZDNet - 2015.04.10, John F Sowa |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Watch out Watson: Here comes Amazon Machine Learning - ZDNet - 2015.04.10, Nancy Lawler |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Watch out Watson: Here comes Amazon Machine Learning - ZDNet - 2015.04.10, John F Sowa |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Watch out Watson: Here comes Amazon Machine Learning - ZDNet - 2015.04.10, Matthew West |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |