duszek wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:55 pm
When I said "unproven assumptions" I wanted to stress one characteristic of them which seemed important to me to point out in this context.
We could try to formulate more precisely:
let´s look for assumptions in sentences or utterances, which are by the way by definition unproven.
There.
Are assumptions something that we take for granted in order to proceed in an argument more swiftly ?
swiftly? no... assumptions hold existence together...
there is no guarantee that future events will even occur or that they will resemble past events...
Don’t you think that enigmatic is more a matter of inference than implication?
Who infers what ?
Who implies what ?
Your statement sounds like an allusion to me, not like a general statement about concepts.
Have I inferred or implied something incorrectly ?
Inference requires interpretation. Implication requires projection. The interpreted and projected are meanings. These guidelines are the basis for communicating a meaningful answer to the question.
duszek wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:37 pm
It seems to me that most of what we say if full of unproven assumptions.
The sentence I have just written does not assume anything because of the introduction unit "it seems to me".
The second sentence I have just written does not assume anything either, because it is purely analytical.
Or do you see any assumption in it of any kind ?
Please be as intransigant as Descartes.
Self-negating argument as proof is an unproven assumption.
duszek wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:37 pm
It seems to me that most of what we say if full of unproven assumptions.
The sentence I have just written does not assume anything because of the introduction unit "it seems to me".
The second sentence I have just written does not assume anything either, because it is purely analytical.
Or do you see any assumption in it of any kind ?
Please be as intransigant as Descartes.
The second sentence assumes that if a sentence has a phrase "it seems to me" prepended on a statement then that sentence does not assume anything.
The second sentence also assumes that the "if" was a spelling error and "is" was meant.
duszek wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2019 5:37 pm
It seems to me that most of what we say if full of unproven assumptions.
The sentence I have just written does not assume anything because of the introduction unit "it seems to me".
The second sentence I have just written does not assume anything either, because it is purely analytical.
Or do you see any assumption in it of any kind ?
Please be as intransigant as Descartes.
The second sentence assumes that if a sentence has a phrase "it seems to me" prepended on a statement then that sentence does not assume anything.
The second sentence also assumes that the "if" was a spelling error and "is" was meant.
Am I right?
You are right about the spelling error. But this assumption is safely made because otherwise there is no sense in the sentence at all.
If I start with "it seems to me" then I assume something but only temporarily so this assumption is so weak and wobbly that it is not a serious one.