[MD] Nonrelativizably Used Predicates

Tuukka Virtaperko mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net
Thu Apr 12 15:10:37 PDT 2012


Ron,
>
> Ron:
> Any useful predicate is simple, and economical in explanation.

Tuukka:
Not true. The properties of the predicate "the truth value of the 
Goldbach conjecture" are extremely complicated, yet resolving it would 
be of some importance. Basically, if what you said here were true, any 
mathematics above high school level would be "not useful".

Perhaps you are suggesting, that philosophy should be simple. If this is 
too complicated for you, it's not for you.

> Ron:
> Analyzing the traditionally rationalist term of "everything that exists" or "God" or "reality" or any abstract
> noun,  the discussion is aided by revisiting the monist/pluralist or the rationalist/empiricist or the "one/many"
> inquires of the ancient Greeks. The Socratic dialogs of Plato and Aristotle's
> "metaphysics" are a great place to start to gain a more intelligible hold on the issue you raise.

Tuukka:
You must have misunderstood the issue. By saying that a predicate is not 
useful unless it's simple you are saying mathematic research is not 
useful. You probably didn't mean -that-.

>
> Ron adds:
> If a "nonrelativizably used predicate" is essentially the same as what is known grammatically as an "abstract noun"
> then you are simply trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist with a kind of overcomplicated term
> that does not offer a better, more simplified, easily understandable explanation.

Tuukka:
A predicate is not the same thing as an abstract noun. They are not 
required to be abstract. "Concept" would be a more correct intuitively 
appealing designation.

I don't insist on using unappealing language. My work may be regarded as 
a work in progress, and as such, names of things can be changed. But I 
am currently using the name "nonrelativizably used predicate", because 
it is the technically correct name for that thing, from a mathematical 
point of view. Feel free to suggest a better name for more casual use! 
Not everyone is an analytic philosopher.

Best wishes,
Tuukka



More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list