Re: Dogs, Computers, Joy

Posted by gepr on Jul 28, 2020; 7:19pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Dogs-Computers-Joy-tp7597998p7598008.html

Predicativism: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philosophy-mathematics/#Pre

Your before and after is the same as up and down. It's the *unification* into a definite (http://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/whatsdef.pdf) construct that's problematic.

On 7/28/20 12:03 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
> You are pushing me hard, here, but I think the up/down thang is orthogonal to the predicativist position.  (You invented that word, right?)  We Predicativists need only assert that there is a before and after: i.e., BEFORE we can say whether a thing is, we have to have said, up front, what it would be for that thing to be.  We can take it back soon as we see where it leads.  

--
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/