home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
- Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!silver.ucs.indiana.edu!jwales
- From: jwales@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (jimmy donal wales)
- Subject: Re: Truth again
- Message-ID: <Bz9ILn.HJD@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
- Sender: news@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: silver.ucs.indiana.edu
- Organization: Indiana University
- References: <1gib6mINN76i@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:41:47 GMT
- Lines: 33
-
- Svein:
- >>Hope you're not the Jamie that Aerosmith sing[?] about.
-
- Jamie:
- >I wouldn't know. Presumably, I am, relative to SOME interpretation....
-
- This is precisely what I find so bizarre about your position.
- I don't want to argue about it, really, since I don't know much about
- this whole area. But I would like some more information.
-
- What is a proposition, as distinct from a sentence? I've always
- (well, not always, only for the past few years since I heard about
- such things!) thought of propositions as equivalence classes for
- sentences. But I'm not sure how this fits into your interpretational
- scheme.
-
- Do propositions need interpretation? Or is interpretation the scheme
- that transforms a sentence into a proposition?
-
- Did you say that mental states need interpretation? It seems more
- plausible to say that (at least some!) mental states (or processes)
- ARE interpretation.
-
- Anyhow, anything you can say to shed light here would be appreciated.
-
- I'm not above reading a book, if you want to suggest one. After all,
- Christmas vacation IS coming up and Randall hasn't come through with
- his promised suggested reading on QM. (Nudge, nudge.)
-
- I wish Mikhail Zeleny would attack me.
-
- --Jimbo
-
-