Re: Is 1+1=2 analytic or synthetic?
From: Jesse F. Hughes (jesse_at_phiwumbda.org)
Date: 01/08/05
- Next message: Volker Hetzer: "Re: We are going to need to say this over and over again: "Bush stole it!""
- Previous message: |-|erc: "Easy question: WHICH LIST CONTAINS MORE DIGITS OF Pi?"
- In reply to: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Is 1+1=2 analytic or synthetic?"
- Next in thread: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Is 1+1=2 analytic or synthetic?"
- Reply: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Is 1+1=2 analytic or synthetic?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 10:27:02 +0100
examachine@gmail.com writes:
> So, I agree with Quine that the distinction is a matter of degree. The
> further from the known world we get without collecting new empirical
> facts, the higher risk of falsehood we run.
Where does Quine say that?
--
Jesse F. Hughes
"To [mathematicians] amateur mathematicians are worse than scum, and
scarier than nuclear bombs."
-- James S. Harris on mathematicians' phobias
- Next message: Volker Hetzer: "Re: We are going to need to say this over and over again: "Bush stole it!""
- Previous message: |-|erc: "Easy question: WHICH LIST CONTAINS MORE DIGITS OF Pi?"
- In reply to: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Is 1+1=2 analytic or synthetic?"
- Next in thread: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Is 1+1=2 analytic or synthetic?"
- Reply: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Is 1+1=2 analytic or synthetic?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
