On 28 Mai, 04:37, Virgil <virg...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > > There is nothing inconsistent or illogical in the existence of things > > > for which we do not have names. > > > Unless these things are names only. > > Then different names, being names only, would necessarily be different > things and then the name 1/2 and the name 2/4, being different things, > could not be equal.
Why not? There are laws, i.e., other abstract things, that allow to find out whether two names are the same or not. There are many names identical to the name pi.
> > > > "to exist" is used here in two different meanings such that "there > > > > exist(1) numbers that do not exist(2)" is not a self-contradiction. > > > > It is a contradiction in English. It probably is a contradiction in the > > > German of scholars. But WM would not know about that. > > > In philosophical texts you can find frequently words with different > > meanings that are distinguished by numbers as I did. To be(1) or to be > > (2) or to be(14) that is the question. But you seem not to be(0) aware > > of such scholarly texts. > > If WM had indexed those usages of "exist" in his original claim, he > might be able to justify his present claim, but he didn't and thus can't.
If I had written a philosophical text, I would have explained this, and in fact I did it in many of my contributions here, but nobody can expect that I do so in every contribution. A minimum of brainwork is required to understand my texts, but really, it is a very small amount.
