Not one thing you typed makes any sense in context here.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 1:04 amThus the same thing is expressed through a multitude of words therefore resulting in equivocation.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Jan 17, 2021 1:34 pmIdentity. Literally the same thing.
They're literally the same. So two instances of "cat," or "P" or whatever it might be.1. And what determines the two terms being the same
If "identity" results in "sameness" and "sameness" results in "identity" then a circular reasoning occurs.
Saying two instances of "P" or "Cat" to occur necessitates the instances as seperate thus different.
P=/=P
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: P=/=P
Re: P=/=P
1. You cannot have two instances of the same thing without there being a difference in the manifestation of the circumstances, multiple instances result in a difference within the instances.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:27 amNot one thing you typed makes any sense in context here.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 1:04 amThus the same thing is expressed through a multitude of words therefore resulting in equivocation.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Sun Jan 17, 2021 1:34 pm
Identity. Literally the same thing.
They're literally the same. So two instances of "cat," or "P" or whatever it might be.
If "identity" results in "sameness" and "sameness" results in "identity" then a circular reasoning occurs.
Saying two instances of "P" or "Cat" to occur necessitates the instances as seperate thus different.
2. Identity being defined by sameness and sameness being defined by identity is circular reasoning.
3. One particular word expressed through a multitude of other seemingly different words results in equivocation.
Re: P=/=P
Equivocation can be expressed under a multitude of different words.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: P=/=P
You understand that the different instances are of the same term, right? For example, if we write "cat," and then write "cat" again. The reference of "cat" has to be the same thing in both cases. So in other words, there's just one cat that the term "cat" is "pointing" to, and every occurrence of the term "cat" has to point at that same cat, in the same respect, at the same time, etc.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: P=/=P
Just fyi, since I didn't make this explicit earlier and I realize it might not be intuitively obvious, the convention is that when we put a term in quotation marks, we're referring to the term as a term--as a word we can write or say. When we leave off the quotation marks, we're referring to the thing, not the term.
Hence "cat" has three letters and starts with a "c," but a cat doesn't. A cat drinks milk and meows and so on. This is also known as the use/mention distinction. "Cat" is the mention side and a cat is the use side.
Hence "cat" has three letters and starts with a "c," but a cat doesn't. A cat drinks milk and meows and so on. This is also known as the use/mention distinction. "Cat" is the mention side and a cat is the use side.
Re: P=/=P
To refer to the same cat under multiple times is to observe the same cat under different contexts thus necessitating referencing of the cat one time as different under another time.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:35 amYou understand that the different instances are of the same term, right? For example, if we write "cat," and then write "cat" again. The reference of "cat" has to be the same thing in both cases. So in other words, there's just one cat that the term "cat" is "pointing" to, and every occurrence of the term "cat" has to point at that same cat, in the same respect, at the same time, etc.
The "cat = cat" observes "cat" expressed under different contexts thus not the same cat is observed.
Re: P=/=P
Mentioning a term is the use of the term. To mention something is to use it.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:40 am Just fyi, since I didn't make this explicit earlier and I realize it might not be intuitively obvious, the convention is that when we put a term in quotation marks, we're referring to the term as a term--as a word we can write or say. When we leave off the quotation marks, we're referring to the thing, not the term.
Hence "cat" has three letters and starts with a "c," but a cat doesn't. A cat drinks milk and meows and so on. This is also known as the use/mention distinction. "Cat" is the mention side and a cat is the use side.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: P=/=P
No! That's just what we're avoiding. Each occurrence of the term MUST refer to exactly the same thing, in exactly the same respect, at exactly the same time, etc.
Re: P=/=P
The occurence of the same thing, under the same respect and at the same time cannot be observed under multiple instances as the instances necessitate a seperation. P=P necessitates multiple instances of the same thing, thus each observation is a different context.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:48 amNo! That's just what we're avoiding. Each occurrence of the term MUST refer to exactly the same thing, in exactly the same respect, at exactly the same time, etc.
At best identity should be described simply as "P", not "P=P".
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: P=/=P
It has nothing to do with general senses of those terms. "Use" is the object itself. "Mention" is the term qua the term. Think of it like if we were to write "bleup" and "fleub" for the distinction instead. Don't think of everyday senses of "use" and "mention."Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:47 amMentioning a term is the use of the term. To mention something is to use it.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:40 am Just fyi, since I didn't make this explicit earlier and I realize it might not be intuitively obvious, the convention is that when we put a term in quotation marks, we're referring to the term as a term--as a word we can write or say. When we leave off the quotation marks, we're referring to the thing, not the term.
Hence "cat" has three letters and starts with a "c," but a cat doesn't. A cat drinks milk and meows and so on. This is also known as the use/mention distinction. "Cat" is the mention side and a cat is the use side.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: P=/=P
What I'm talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with observation.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:51 amThe occurence of the same thing, under the same respect and at the same time cannot be observed under multiple instances as the instances necessitate a seperation. P=P necessitates multiple instances of the same thing, thus each observation is a different context.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:48 amNo! That's just what we're avoiding. Each occurrence of the term MUST refer to exactly the same thing, in exactly the same respect, at exactly the same time, etc.
At best identity should be described simply as "P", not "P=P".
Re: P=/=P
Any proposition or term, as assumed, is observed. P=P is multiple instances thus multiple contexts.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:54 amWhat I'm talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with observation.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:51 amThe occurence of the same thing, under the same respect and at the same time cannot be observed under multiple instances as the instances necessitate a seperation. P=P necessitates multiple instances of the same thing, thus each observation is a different context.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:48 am
No! That's just what we're avoiding. Each occurrence of the term MUST refer to exactly the same thing, in exactly the same respect, at exactly the same time, etc.
At best identity should be described simply as "P", not "P=P".
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 4548
- Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
- Location: NYC Man
Re: P=/=P
That's fine, but what I'm talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with observation, so you're not at all even understanding the context.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:55 amAny proposition or term, as assumed, is obseThatsTerrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:54 amWhat I'm talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with observation.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:51 am
The occurence of the same thing, under the same respect and at the same time cannot be observed under multiple instances as the instances necessitate a seperation. P=P necessitates multiple instances of the same thing, thus each observation is a different context.
At best identity should be described simply as "P", not "P=P".
Re: P=/=P
There is no object in itself. Mention of a term through the term is use of the term. If the everyday sense of the words "use" and "mention" are observed then you are equating one term(s) with multiple terms thus resulting in equivocation.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:53 amIt has nothing to do with general senses of those terms. "Use" is the object itself. "Mention" is the term qua the term. Think of it like if we were to write "bleup" and "fleub" for the distinction instead. Don't think of everyday senses of "use" and "mention."Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:47 amMentioning a term is the use of the term. To mention something is to use it.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:40 am Just fyi, since I didn't make this explicit earlier and I realize it might not be intuitively obvious, the convention is that when we put a term in quotation marks, we're referring to the term as a term--as a word we can write or say. When we leave off the quotation marks, we're referring to the thing, not the term.
Hence "cat" has three letters and starts with a "c," but a cat doesn't. A cat drinks milk and meows and so on. This is also known as the use/mention distinction. "Cat" is the mention side and a cat is the use side.