Re: Monads and Objects
- From: John Jones <jonescardiff@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:20:43 -0800 (PST)
On Nov 27, 8:48�pm, Marshall <marshall.spi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 27, 11:55 am, John Jones <jonescard...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
A universe with one object has no distinctions. The number of objects
is 0.
This universe has one object and it also has zero objects? Don't you
mean
it has zero distinctions?
A universe of one object is a universe of no objects. This is not in
conflict with our blanket notion of 'object'.
A universe with three objects has two distinctions.
A distinction is something that is a property of a unique pair
of objects. In a universe with three objects, we have the distinctions
between (a, b), (b, c), and (a, c). So a universe with three
objects has three distinctions.
There is only a and b.
Regarding pairs: I need another object, aside from a and b, if I am to
distinguish a and b in another way, as a pair for example. A
distinction in a pair is a property of at least 3 objects, and more if
we want.
Your (a, b), (b, c), and (a, c) would then require a universe of 8
objects, I estimate. These would be a,b,c,d to discern a, b, and c,
and then e, f, g, h to discern the pairs.
These simple considerations dispose of solipsism and suggest that
there can be one God only if there is one man.
Since neither "God" nor "man" appear in any of the above
I don't see how that follows.
If there is an object, God, then I need another object to distinguish
it as one object. That object, with some poetic licence, is man. So I
alone and God alone, require two objects for each case.
The general rule appears to be n = n-1.
If there are four objects there are six distinctions.
If there are five objects there are ten distinctions.
I estimate more, if you are regarding a distinction as a property of a
pair.
The general formula is sum(1 .. n-1) or more simply (n^2 - n) / 2.
Marshall
That's one way of putting it. But what way? What are these dots?
What's this upside down v thingy? Are you quoting from scripture?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Monads and Objects
- From: thinker
- Re: Monads and Objects
- From: Marshall
- Re: Monads and Objects
- From: G . Frege
- Re: Monads and Objects
- References:
- Monads and Objects
- From: John Jones
- Re: Monads and Objects
- From: Marshall
- Monads and Objects
- Prev by Date: Re: Torkel Franzen on truth
- Next by Date: Re: Monads and Objects
- Previous by thread: Re: Monads and Objects
- Next by thread: Re: Monads and Objects
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|