On 2/5/2013 11:02 AM, WM wrote: > On 5 Feb., 17:06, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
> This correspondence is as impossible, as I have shown above, as > finding a set of natural numbers with negative sum.
What you have shown, at best, is that certain syntactic representations are subject to the factual problem of semantic indeterminacy.
There are, in general, two acceptable notions of identity. One can follow the ontological emphasis of Wittgenstein wherein Leibniz' principle of the identity of indiscernibles is denied in favor of "self-identity" or you have the principle of the identity of indiscernibles where identity is inextricably linked to diversity.
Since "identity" is such a loaded word, it is best to use some other term for what a mathematician would normally call "the identity map". Say we use the term "recitation".
Now, what notion of identity do you ascribe to material contexts and what notion of identity do you ascribe to abstract contexts?
How do you assert a notion of identity for which no involution corresponding to recitation exists?