Heidegger

Cologne 28-Apr-2008
allen scult schrieb Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:20:34 +0900:
> >Joe to Ant:
> >
> >> you seem to be puzzled by the way language users use the same word time
> >> and again even though the referent changes (however slightly) over time.
> >>
> >> take the word ‘chair’. I use this […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> Self-Identity Over Time — True for All Reality Types?
>
> Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >Joseph Polanik wrote:
>
> >>>Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >>>>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>
> >>>>>Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>3. But there is no evidence that anything remains identical
> >>>>>>>>throughout all my perceptions.
>
> >>>>>I have addressed your premise 3. […]

Self-Identity Over Time — True for All Reality Types?
Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>>Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>>>>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>>>>Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>>>>>>>>3. But there is no evidence that anything remains identical
>>>>>>>>throughout all my perceptions.
>>>>>I have addressed your premise 3. I have expressed my skepticism of
>>>>>it. let me summarize and […]

In a message dated 27/04/2008 17:23:32 GMT Standard Time,
crifasian at gmail.com writes:
Joseph Polanik wrote:
> in the context of the discussion of of Anthony’s premise, ‘if I exist;
> then, I am self-identical throughout all my perceptions’, there is an
> ambguity concerning ‘identity’ (which human am I) and ‘identicality’
> (whether I am […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> Assumptions About Predicating Nothingness
>
> >>======================================================================
> >>Clarification 3: The Ultimate Choice
> >>======================================================================
>
> >>naturally, [7] is not the finally use of modus tollens that you make.
> >>you can combine [3] and [7]; although, since you aren’t allowed to
> >>deduce a denial of facts (-E), you deduce -A1: […]

Assumptions About Predicating Nothingness
>>======================================================================
>>Clarification 3: The Ultimate Choice
>>======================================================================
>>naturally, [7] is not the finally use of modus tollens that you make.
>>you can combine [3] and [7]; although, since you aren’t allowed to
>>deduce a denial of facts (-E), you deduce -A1: it is possible to
>>attribute predicates to nothing.
>>but […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> in the context of the discussion of of Anthony’s premise, ‘if I exist;
> then, I am self-identical throughout all my perceptions’, there is an
> ambguity concerning ‘identity’ (which human am I) and ‘identicality’
> (whether I am 100% identical over time).
not really. All Hume is saying is that whatever about you changes, […]

michaelP wrote:
>Joe to Ant:
>>you seem to be puzzled by the way language users use the same word
>>time and again even though the referent changes (however slightly)
>>over time.
>>take the word ‘chair’. I use this word to denote my chair day after
>>day even though the changes constantly. The fabric is […]

GEVANS613 at aol.com wrote:
> The reifications *reality* and the *self* are inappropriate conceptual
> instantiations representing nothing more than the febrile activity of
> sundry nutty neuro-nets.
then your argument is with Joe, not with me.

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> ======================================================================
> Clarification 1. Actual Operation of Modus Tollens
> ======================================================================
>
> modus tollens is the name for the following logical operation:
>
> [1] P -> Q {Assumption Set 1}
> [2] -Q […]