Hi Dick,

I've cooperative so far because you have been constructing conservative premises. Here, though, I have an objection.

***6. It is possible to label all of these "things" with numbers.***

This assumes identity. Why don't we talk about this explicitly.

P-6. All 'things' have a unique identity.

Hence,

6. It is possible to label all of these 'things' with numbers.


Now, if (P-6) is correct, then (6) naturally follows since (P-6) is saying that 'things' are distinguishable (have different properties, attributes, definitions, etc). Numbers are simply a mental means by which to represent the uniqueness and separability of 'things'.

But, my question is, how do you know that (P-6) is correct?

Warm regards, Harv

• I don't follow you! - doctordick - September 16, 2002 - 14:59 UTC
  • Let me explain - harvey1 - September 16, 2002 - 18:31 UTC
    • Once again, we are askew of the issue. - doctordick - September 17, 2002 - 18:15 UTC
      • Let me be more clear - harvey1 - September 17, 2002 - 19:06 UTC
        • You are beating a dead horse! - doctordick - September 19, 2002 - 15:55 UTC
          • I can respond quickly - harvey1 - September 19, 2002 - 18:26 UTC
            • Sorry I am slow. - doctordick - September 20, 2002 - 17:01 UTC
              • Sorry that I am fast - harvey1 - September 20, 2002 - 17:37 UTC
                • Going slow is sometimes helpful. - doctordick - September 24, 2002 - 14:35 UTC