Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Replies: 119   Last Post: Apr 27, 2003 8:26 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
George Dance

Posts: 394
Registered: 12/8/04
Re: number numeral
Posted: Apr 12, 2003 7:25 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply


blackbur@math.umn.edu (Leonard Blackburn) wrote in message news:<aa503d8.0304100739.49a5ce20@posting.google.com>...
> georgedance@hotmail.com (George Dance) wrote in message news:<6312c50b.0304090906.28901429@posting.google.com>...
> > G. Frege <g.frege@simple-line.de> wrote in message news:<amg79vkueu78pp35ui38bscpmkd41i09fc@4ax.com>...
> > > On 8 Apr 2003 23:24:15 -0700, georgedance@hotmail.com (George Dance) wrote:
> > >

> > > > >
> > > > > And the number 3 is ...in which apple? In all three? Or in only one of them? :-)
> > > > >

> > > > It's obviously a property of the set.
> > > >

> > > Great!!! (Congratulations!)
> > >
> > > Now originally you said:

> > > > > >
> > > > > > So what's a natural number? Do they exist in space and time? I've
> > > > > > argued that they do, as properties of things; they exist in things,
> > > > > > not independently.

> > >
> > > If "numbers exist in space and time, as properties of things" then sets are
> > > things in space and time, right? ... Are they?
> > >
> > > I mean... If there are 3 apples on my desk, where (the heck) is the set??? I
> > > CAN'T see it!

> >
> > Then what do you mean by 'apples'? If you're not referring to the
> > apples as a set, why do you mean by the plural? And why are you
> > describing it as "3"?
> >
> > You've got the idea that "there are three apples on my desk"; and you
> > claim you did not get that from seeing (or, I presume, from any
> > perception at all) of the things on your desk. Whence did it come,
> > then?
> >

> > > Now you also said "they [numbers] exist in things" ... In _which_ things?
> > > Obviously not in the apples... Now if the number 3 is not in the 3 apples on my desk in which thing (the heck) is it then???

> >
> > If, as you claim, "the number 3 is not in the 3 apples," then why are
> > you calling them "the 3 apples"?

> [snip]
>
> What do you mean by "in the 3 apples"?


I mean that, iff the statement "There are three apples on my desk" is
true, then it is a physical fact about the apples on my desk that
there are three of them.

> Is it physical?

The three apples (or the two lighters in the real example I gave you)
are physical.

> Is it made up of atoms?

I believe the lighters are made up of atoms; if so, the fact that
there are three lighters would depend on the particular arrangement of
particular atoms.

> If so, which atoms?

Whatever atoms there are that make these three objects lighters, I
suppose.

> If the number 3 is "in the 3 apples" then is it wholly intact in each
> one of them, or is it split up, a third of itself in each? I'm not
> getting this. What do you mean by a "property" of a physical object
> and by a "property" of a collection of physical objects?
> Leonard


I really don't understand what you're not getting. Maybe a further
example would make it clearer.

"I have some blue lighters on my desk." Would you agree that that
statement is either true or false? Would you further agree that
whether the statement is true or false depends on physical facts about
the lighters? If so, we can move on to see why '2' is similar.

If not, is the problem that you have trouble also getting what the
statement "There are some blue lighters on my desk," means? After
all, I haven't told you how 'blue' is in the lighters; or whether
'blue' is made of atoms; or whether the 'blue' is intact in each
lighter, or split up so that only 1/3 of blue is in each?

There are many different possible answers to this 'problem of
universals' (as it's known), and if that is your barrier here, we can
spend some time on talking about them. I'd really rather not get into
universals unless you honestly cannot see how the lighters can be blue
in fact, or that there can actually be two of them.



Date Subject Author
4/5/03
Read Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/5/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Virgil
4/5/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/7/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/9/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/11/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/11/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/11/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/11/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/12/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/12/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/12/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/12/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/12/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/12/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Chris Menzel
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Chris Menzel
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Chris Menzel
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/14/03
Read Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/16/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Poker Joker
4/16/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Poker Joker
4/17/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/17/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Jon Cast
4/17/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/19/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
John Jones
4/20/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Jon Cast
4/19/03
Read 2, sets and numbers
John Jones
4/20/03
Read Re: 2, sets and numbers
Poker Joker
4/18/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Poker Joker
4/19/03
Read Re: Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/20/03
Read Re:*Sets and numbers
Jesse Nowells
4/20/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
John Forkosh
4/20/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/20/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
John Forkosh
4/20/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/21/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
John Forkosh
4/21/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/21/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
George Greene
4/25/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
Chris Menzel
4/27/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
George Dance
4/26/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
Paul Holbach
4/20/03
Read Re: *Sets and numbers
Robert Kolker
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/15/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/16/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/17/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/17/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
karl malbrain
4/17/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/18/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
karl malbrain
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
mensanator
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/13/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/14/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/10/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
George Dance
4/11/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Lao Coon
4/5/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Barb Knox
4/5/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/5/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Mechanic
4/5/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Virgil
4/5/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Barb Knox
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/7/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Robert J. Pease
4/8/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
karl malbrain
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
karl malbrain
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
karl malbrain
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Jacob W. Haller
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Dirk Van de moortel
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Dirk Van de moortel
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Dirk Van de moortel
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Dirk Van de moortel
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
G. Frege
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/7/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
G. Frege
4/9/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
talysman
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
talysman
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Poker Joker
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Jacob W. Haller
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
talysman
4/6/03
Read Re: Who is too stupid to agree with Phil?
Jacob W. Haller
4/6/03
Read number numeral
John Jones
4/8/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/8/03
Read Re: number numeral
G. Frege
4/9/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/9/03
Read Re: number numeral
G. Frege
4/9/03
Read Re: number numeral
Leonard Blackburn
4/9/03
Read Re: number numeral
G. Frege
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
G. Frege
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/9/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
Leonard Blackburn
4/12/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/9/03
Read Re: number numeral
Jacob W. Haller
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
Leonard Blackburn
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
Jacob W. Haller
4/11/03
Read Re: number numeral
Leonard Blackburn
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
Jacob W. Haller
4/11/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance
4/10/03
Read Re: number numeral
Leonard Blackburn
4/11/03
Read Re: number numeral
George Dance

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.