In what ways does this question exist?

[Kharakov]

Question mark.

 

[fromderinside]

Mark my words?

 

[Speakpigeon]

Question mark.

?

EB

 

[bilby]

Mark my words?

3/10. Must try harder.

 

[Kharakov]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

 

[bilby]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

Is a bunch of Nitrogen, Oxygen, and Water molecules above a body of warm water a cyclone? Or is a cyclone a dynamic pattern of behaviour of those component parts?

A thought is made of brain activity; but that doesn't imply that the brain activity is a thought.

When you reduce it to its parts, the whole is no longer there. One does not buy a table from IKEA. One buys a kit - all the parts are there, but before you can eat your dinner off it, you have to assemble them in the right pattern. The whole is more than the sum of the parts.

 

[Hermit]

In the first place it exists out there in the ontological sky. Then it has pierced your skull (thanks Plato, you old wanker), so now it also exists in the sphere of mere appearances.

 

[Angry Floof]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

Is a bunch of Nitrogen, Oxygen, and Water molecules above a body of warm water a cyclone? Or is a cyclone a dynamic pattern of behaviour of those component parts?

A thought is made of brain activity; but that doesn't imply that the brain activity is a thought.

When you reduce it to its parts, the whole is no longer there. One does not buy a table from IKEA. One buys a kit - all the parts are there, but before you can eat your dinner off it, you have to assemble them in the right pattern. The whole is more than the sum of the parts.

Dare I say... a holistic view?

 

[Speakpigeon]

Mark my words?

3/10. Must try harder.

Alright! I see!

Gosh, it took me 24 hours to get what you meant.

Good one!

Yeah, that's one possibility.
EB

 

[DBT]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

It's all about Quantum fields, man, Quantum fields.....

 

[fromderinside]

I'd like to play, but, thoughts keep escaping me.

 

[Speakpigeon]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

I only have an epistemological answer. The ideas I know are all always in my mind, and only at the moment I have them. If not, I don't know them.

Still, I'm prepared to grant that ideas must exist outside my mind, in other people's mind, for example. But, it remains the case that I don't actually know that to be true.

I'm also less clear about this idea that ideas exist already, somehow, outside people's mind.

If there's anything at all, I don't think it's ideas, at least not the kind of ideas we have in our minds.

Although, I would accept the possibility of something not human having ideas as well. Even machines, at some point in the future. And other animals.

That's my idea of it anyway.
EB

 

[fast]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

Do dinosaurs exist? Before anyone leaps at the notion that there are dinosaurs alive now by regarding certain animals as dinosaurs such as alligators, let us suppose for sake of unnecessary added complexity that no dinosaurs are alive today.

That being said, one possible response is "no silly. Dinosaurs are extinct. Dinosaurs do not exist. They once did but currently do not."

However, by a more broadened scope, if we were to regard existence such that to say of something that it exists is to say of something that it has properties, then saying what era they once lived is to say something true about dinosaurs, so while it's so that they are extinct, they would not therefore be nonexistent, like a unicorn, where no instantiaion of them can be made along the time continuum.

Also, we should be wary of the term, "must." The issue oughtnt be if certain things must exist but whether they do.

Also, we oughtnt lose sight of the often conflated thing we might regard as an abstraction with something quite different that we might otherwise regard as an abstract object. An abstraction is mind-dependent whereas an abstract object is not.

We should be most careful to refrain from thinking that just because something exists that it therefore exists in some place. It's mighty convenient to say of the mind that it's in the brain, for example. If it's indeed there as the activity of the brain, then what it gives rise to need not be there.

So much to say and only moments to type.

 

[bilby]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

Do dinosaurs exist? Before anyone leaps at the notion that there are dinosaurs alive now by regarding certain animals as dinosaurs such as alligators, let us suppose for sake of unnecessary added complexity that no dinosaurs are alive today.

Alligators and other crocodilians are NOT dinosaurs. Birds are, though.

 

[fast]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

Do dinosaurs exist? Before anyone leaps at the notion that there are dinosaurs alive now by regarding certain animals as dinosaurs such as alligators, let us suppose for sake of unnecessary added complexity that no dinosaurs are alive today.

Alligators and other crocodilians are NOT dinosaurs. Birds are, though.

Only you! (I say that with respect)

Are brontosauruses alive today?

Fact #1: brontosauruses are not alive today.

Are brontosauruses extinct?

Fact #2: brontosauruses are extinct.

My point is that those facts do not imply nonexistence. It's a common error to think otherwise.

Oh, but no fast, you oughtn't hold that something that used to have properties still do. Fast, you should say they used to have properties.

But, there are dinosaur fossils; that's a property of dinosaurs!

No no no fast! They used to be a property of dinosaurs. It's like you don't know what a property is! Dinosaurs don't exist; their bones do. There are things you can say about the bones; how much they weigh for instance.

But I can say what dinosaurs used to weigh!

Yes, used to weigh, but not what they weigh.

You're starting to remind me of Bilby, always right!

Well fast, you need to come to grips with the distinction between what exists vs what doesn't. Everything doesn't last forever.

Damn it, I'm telling you something about dinosaurs by telling you about what they were like. They have the property of fossilization.

Listen to yourself: what they WERE like.

Go to hell

Calm down buddy boy; you'll get over it

I'm going to sign out for now before I violate a terms of agreement

(Super duper smiley)

 

[fromderinside]

All I know is that I am not voting in that poll. Who takes over my brain sometimes?


The point was that ideas must exist somewhere, in some form. Do you consider the abstract data (1s,0s) to be the idea? Do you consider the EM fields in your computer's memory to be the idea? Or is it only existent in the brain of the perceptor?

Do dinosaurs exist? Before anyone leaps at the notion that there are dinosaurs alive now by regarding certain animals as dinosaurs such as alligators, let us suppose for sake of unnecessary added complexity that no dinosaurs are alive today.

Alligators and other crocodilians are NOT dinosaurs. Birds are, though.

It's like fast wrote, feathered flying varieties were dinosaurs, but, those things have been replaced by modern birds. No cigar.

 

[bilby]

Alligators and other crocodilians are NOT dinosaurs. Birds are, though.

It's like fast wrote, feathered flying varieties were dinosaurs, but, those things have been replaced by modern birds. No cigar.

Birds are dinosaurs.

Our great great great grandfathers were humans, but those things have been replaced by modern humans. Still, both are humans.

A chicken has as much claim to being a dinosaur as a T. Rex does. And if you ever meet a cassowary, you will be in no doubt that dinosaurs are still with us.

 

[fast]

Alligators and other crocodilians are NOT dinosaurs. Birds are, though.

It's like fast wrote, feathered flying varieties were dinosaurs, but, those things have been replaced by modern birds. No cigar.

Birds are dinosaurs.

Our great great great grandfathers were humans, but those things have been replaced by modern humans. Still, both are humans.

A chicken has as much claim to being a dinosaur as a T. Rex does. And if you ever meet a cassowary, you will be in no doubt that dinosaurs are still with us.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The first chicken comes from a chicken egg, but the first chicken egg came not from chickens but instead nonchickens --non chickens that mated and had a mutation that resulted in the first chicken eggs. Something like that. Forget how it goes exactly. But within that bullshit is the scientific explanation.

Our great great great grandfathers were not only humans but Homo sapiens as well, but go back just enough, they'll continue to be humans but not Homo sapiens--go too far and they'll neither be humans nor Homo sapiens.

But, either way, I didn't wanna fight ya on it; that's why I changed it to brontosauruses. Do they exist?

 

[fromderinside]

Alligators and other crocodilians are NOT dinosaurs. Birds are, though.

It's like fast wrote, feathered flying varieties were dinosaurs, but, those things have been replaced by modern birds. No cigar.

Birds are dinosaurs.

Our great great great grandfathers were humans, but those things have been replaced by modern humans. Still, both are humans.

A chicken has as much claim to being a dinosaur as a T. Rex does. And if you ever meet a cassowary, you will be in no doubt that dinosaurs are still with us.

I agree with you. Although you analogy is flawed. For instance I'd have gone to Homo Erectus and still concluded homo sapiens are tool making hominids.

Not having genetic continuity from most dinosaurs with either modern terrestrial dinosaurs or flying dinosaurs makes any other argument than what you propose impossible. I am left with, given the existing evidence available to us, the only conclusion that makes sense from those sources of evidence is modern birds and terrestrial forms are dinosaurs.

I just think there is so much difference between birds and ancient dinosaurs leads to reasonable impulse to break birds from dinosaurs. I have similar problems with current designations for mollusks as well.

However I must admit I can't say evolution of mammals to stand on two legs is enough to separate man from mammal as was done in the 17th century.

So thanks for providing the impulse for this old man to look at evidence I've not previously considered.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Do dinosaurs exist? Before anyone leaps at the notion that there are dinosaurs alive now by regarding certain animals as dinosaurs such as alligators, let us suppose for sake of unnecessary added complexity that no dinosaurs are alive today.
That being said, one possible response is "no silly. Dinosaurs are extinct. Dinosaurs do not exist. They once did but currently do not."

Beware, some dinosaurs will read this and resent it. You've just claimed they don't exist! Yet, if they are reading you now, surely they exist!

Never forget that some people are real dinosaurs.

Indeed, you probably are one, for example! And, yes, may be me too.

And as far as I can tell, lots of people posting on this forum. This seems to be a dinosaur-friendly forum.

<snipe> The issue oughtnt be if certain things must exist but whether they do.

Also, we oughtnt lose sight of <snipe>

This dinosaur thinks dinosaurs oughtn't spell oughtn't "oughtnt".

the often conflated thing we might regard as an abstraction with something quite different that we might otherwise regard as an abstract object. An abstraction is mind-dependent whereas an abstract object is not.

If so then abstractions are ideas and they exist as such, and we know they exist as such. Which ought to be a good thing.

Abstract objects, on the other hand, we have no idea whether they exist as real objects, "out there". If didn't, they then would nonetheless exist as ideas.

Everything we know doesn't exist, exists as an idea!

However, by a more broadened scope, if we were to regard existence such that to say of something that it exists is to say of something that it has properties, then saying what era they once lived is to say something true about dinosaurs, so while it's so that they are extinct, they would not therefore be nonexistent, like a unicorn, where no instantiaion of them can be made along the time continuum.

There's certainly a problem with our notion of 'existence'. You will remember this criticism that we shouldn't treat existence as a property?

The fact that dinosaurs don't exist today does not imply that they exist today.

The fact that you and me are dinosaurs doesn't change this.

We should be most careful to refrain from thinking that just because something exists that it therefore exists in some place. It's mighty convenient to say of the mind that it's in the brain, for example. If it's indeed there as the activity of the brain, then what it gives rise to need not be there.

Yet the question remains as to what would be this thing that the mind would give rise to.

Any idea?

So much to say and only moments to type.

You're forgiven.
EB