2. analog
  3. 170029-5898

On ''what there is''

The question looks ''philosophical'' in the sense of ''what exist?''. In the old terminology ''ontology question''.
The modern formulation (by Quine) is: ''what are the values of your variables''? In our hobby ''what are
the new available components''?  Can one person know what are available components? Obviously not
but we have ''collective knowledge''. Each contribution is welcome. Like in science. But like in science there
are individuals with special contributions. Raul with his MM contributions and his ''successor'' chakster
with his contributions about ''both kinds'': MC's and MM's. Despite his ''modest means''. I think we should
be thankful to have such individuals.
128x128nandric
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,094 posts
 
Are all of you high? Don’t hide it,let’s divide it!!!!
It is the "mana" coming from the sky at the "end of times" for those who own eyes that could "eat" it...




«Is the fact that your eyes could eat made your toungue able to see? Or is it the reverse?»- Groucho Marx 🤓

«It is called cenesthesia brother , are you deaf?»-Harpo Marx
lpretiring
464 posts
 
I think I've found my Geoff Kait replacement.
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,094 posts
 
I doubt Geoff could be replaced...But i know what you means...

I like him also if you talk about the OP....
hilde45's avatar
hilde45
4,974 posts
 
From SEP, Quine entry: "What entities we ought to commit ourselves to depends on a prior descriptive account of what entities theories are committed to."

I take this to mean that the things people profess to believe in (in audio, here) depend on how they've decided to describe the world, including the categories reigning over those descriptions.

Gavagai, people.
lpretiring
464 posts
 
The OP, yes.
More to discover