Luis,

I have no idea what has happened to our discussion. Ontology deals with what actually exists. The root 'ontos' is the Greek word for being. Ontology literally means the study of being. This word is widely used in philosophy, and it is often paralleled with the word 'metaphysics'. Meta in Greek, as I understand, means 'behind' or 'hidden'. Hence, metaphysics literally means what is actually happening in the background of physics.

When I say that we all are committed to some kind of ontology, what I am saying is that we are all committed to the existence of something. Our language usage often dictates what that 'something' is. In the case of materialists, that 'something' is a material thing that exists. Everything else is reducible to material things.

Why is our discussion stopping?

***"The consequence of accepting the existence of 'meaning' is, from what I can tell, an admission of some form of theism (i.e., meaning requires some form of Sentience which you said so yourself)." It is this basis I'm trying to examine. However, it seems to me we'll never get beyond where we are right now.***

But you said so yourself that 'meaning' requires sentience. If meaning exists (i.e., it is not reducible to some material thing), then sentience is required to exist.

I'm thrown for a loop here. Help me out...

Warm regards, Harv

• I don't want to stop! - luis_hamburgh - June 21, 2002 - 13:54 UTC
  • Good to hear - harvey1 - June 22, 2002 - 03:03 UTC
    • Knowledge vs. reality - luis_hamburgh - June 24, 2002 - 14:53 UTC
      • Getting back to basics - harvey1 - June 24, 2002 - 17:55 UTC
        • I too shall take a short hiatus. - luis_hamburgh - June 25, 2002 - 16:15 UTC
          • One for the road - harvey1 - June 25, 2002 - 18:54 UTC
            • Sorry, I thought you'd stepped out for awhile. - luis_hamburgh - July 1, 2002 - 18:34 UTC