In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> 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.
False. There is only one *name* that is identical to the name "pi", and that is "pi" itself, but there are lots of names which name the same number that "pi" names.
WM still does not understand the differnce between a name and the thing named. That is only one of his major errors in logical comprehension.
> A minimum of brainwork is > required to understand my texts, but really, it is a very small > amount.
Actually, there is a major absence of brain work that is required to accept WM's theses.