New answers tagged ontology
1
vote
What does mean “realitas objectiva” in scholastic ontology?
Heidegger describes an inversion of meaning of realitas objectiva from Descartes and Scholasticism to Kant and modernism (depending on your subscription), in The Basic Problems of Phenomenology, ...
- 5,198
0
votes
Chaos vs statistical mechanics vs complexity science
Nonlinear dynamics is a field of mathematics with applications to physical science which is concerned with predicting the behavior of equations which exhibit large changes in the output values for ...
- 3,400
4
votes
Chaos vs statistical mechanics vs complexity science
As far as I understand it, I think chaos theory basically says:
There are some functions that depend so strongly on their initial conditions, that a very small difference in the initial conditions ...
- 573
1
vote
Chaos vs statistical mechanics vs complexity science
Chaos denotes confusion, randomness and the apparent absence of any kind of order. Complexity suggests multiple effects and components interacting in a way that is difficult or impossible to fathom- ...
- 13.1k
2
votes
Chaos vs statistical mechanics vs complexity science
A basic concept in this field is the concept of “deterministic chaos”.
The well-known Mandelbrot set shows those complex numbers c where the iteration of the simple quadratic function f(z):= z^2+c ...
- 24.1k
0
votes
Can we paint or draw imaginary or nonexistent objects?
Again you seem to be confusing different meanings of the word exist. You can draw or paint whatever you like, consciously imagining your subject or not (for example by throwing paint at a canvass with ...
- 13.1k
1
vote
Can we paint or draw imaginary or nonexistent objects?
Yes. Here you can see an image of a unicorn:
- 36.1k
1
vote
Circularity in definition of Real
You say :
I'm having a hard time understanding the adjective 'real'.
Well, you should, because no-one knows.
For example, if you go to Wikipedia to find out what is "earth" you will end up ...
- 1,634
1
vote
Accepted
Circularity in definition of Real
OP: How can we define Reality = {x: x ∈ Reality} and make it be informative?
Short answer: Actuality = {x: x ∈ Reality && x.exists}
Kant defines something as 'real' if it is possible, in ...
- 5,198
1
vote
Circularity in definition of Real
... to say that y is a real boy, is to say that y is a boy, and y is in the collection of things that are real.
You might find it useful to reflect on Real Men Don't Eat Quiche, by Bruce Feirstein: ...
- 455
1
vote
What is the definition of real?
"If a tree falls in a forest and no-one witnesses it, did it happen?"
Reality is that for which the answer is "yes".
Certainly a concept in philosophy exists for which the answer ...
- 1,730
0
votes
What is the definition of real?
What is the definition of real?
Strictly speaking, the definition of "real" is, and can only be, an ostensive definition.
You ostensively define what is real by pointing a finger at what ...
- 6,242
3
votes
What is the definition of real?
"Cogito, ergo sum."
I think, therefore I am. The only thing we can readily depend upon being real is ourselves.
Of course, this is tremendously unlikely and raises a whole host of other ...
- 400
0
votes
What is the definition of real?
I am going to assume that you mean real in the scientific sense. Classically science observes phenomena, not things in themselves, noumena. So, it could be argued that science does not allow us to ...
- 1,729
11
votes
Accepted
What is the definition of real?
There is no one canonical and privileged definition of 'real'. However, in the most intuitive sense, it is anything that is independent of us and our existence and immediately apprehensible. This is ...
- 22.8k
5
votes
What is the definition of real?
Paraphrasing Wikipedia on quantum mechanics, an object is real if outcomes of measurements of the object are well-defined prior to – and independent of – the measurements.
Considering your examples, ...
- 634
1
vote
According to modal realism, how many possible worlds are there?
Swartz[74] mentions a degenerate case of possible-worlds talk with only one possible world. A modal logic with zero possible worlds might be said to not have even our world as possible, as not even a ...
- 12.3k
1
vote
Circularity in definition of Real
The statement that the set of real things contains real things obviously does not define "real".
I agree with Descartes, the overarching set is our Experience (all the things in our current ...
- 107
2
votes
Circularity in definition of Real
Some concepts are fundamental, in the sense that they cannot be explained in terms of anything simpler. For example, distance, time, mass and charge cannot be broken down into more fundamental ideas. ...
- 13.1k
-1
votes
Is science possible in a world where a god acts?
Science is only possible in a world where GOD acts -- there simply is no other source of order to the laws of physics.
However, since YHVH is ancient, these acts occur rarely. So this allows science ...
- 739
0
votes
Why do some philosphers including Russell paraphrase this sentence?
In the philosophy of language, there is a notion known as deep structure which originates with Noam Chomsky. It is the idea that when one uses language for others, that one provides a shallow syntax ...
- 22.8k
1
vote
Why do some philosphers including Russell paraphrase this sentence?
Note that, "There is an x," can be reordered as, "An x is there," where "there" is an indexical for something like the world/reality/existence (as an atmosphere or ...
- 12.3k
1
vote
What is the difference between the “thing in itself” and noumena?
Since Kant holds that, "Space is 3-dimensional," and, "Time is 1-dimensional," are synthetical, he leaves the door open to conceiving, but not visualizing (imagining), higher-...
- 12.3k
5
votes
Why do some philosphers including Russell paraphrase this sentence?
In Fregean terms, a phrase has both a sense and a denotation. For a phrase like "the king of England", the sense is the concept of being king of England, and the denotation is the actual man ...
- 7,464
1
vote
In what shape do opposites exist?
The opposite of A is necessarily not A, but not A is not necessarily the opposite of A. For example, both big and industrious are not small, but industrious is not the opposite of small.
Opposites are ...
- 13.1k
1
vote
Do philosophers analyze the term 'thing'?
Thing theory draws on Heidegger's distinction between objects and things. An object becomes a thing when it ceases to fulfil its common function. Kant refers to das ding an sich, the thing in itself, ...
- 1,729
2
votes
Do philosophers analyze the term 'thing'?
Philosophers, starting from ancient Greece were interested in the being ( "ον" ) thus the term ontology. The being can be considered as the "thing" you say, but with a behavioural ...
- 1,634
3
votes
Accepted
Do philosophers analyze the term 'thing'?
Many philosophical theories don't explicitly riff on 'thing'. However, in analytical language philosophy and natural language philosophy, 'thing' is essentially the same as 'object'. It is related to ...
- 22.8k
1
vote
Is Bhaskar's argument, that epistemology and ontology are separate, correct?
The point is that we necessarily experience, understand and know the world from a human perspective. There is a difference in principle between how things are and how we suppose they are, since our ...
- 13.1k
2
votes
Is the hallucination hypothesis always the best explanation?
There is a very powerful symmetry breaker- reality is experienced in broadly the same way by billions of other people. If you have an everyday experience, the idea that it might be an hallucination is ...
- 13.1k
1
vote
Is the hallucination hypothesis always the best explanation?
In an interconnected world , where consciousness of individuals are connected, it is possible to verify the subjective experience. Science has some understanding of the concept of interconnectedness. ...
- 1,841
1
vote
Is the hallucination hypothesis always the best explanation?
The difference is simple. Many people in this world share the same subjective experience. In the case of A, many people do not share that person’s subjective experience.
If everyone claims to share ...
- 8,250
3
votes
Accepted
Is the hallucination hypothesis always the best explanation?
When is a hallucination the best explanation?
We have a fairly good idea of when and how experiences are unreliable. Just off the top of my head:
When you experience something while in bed in the ...
- 5,414
1
vote
Is Bhaskar's argument, that epistemology and ontology are separate, correct?
They can be composed into a greater concept, regardless of how far from each other they are (and they're not as far as polar opposites!). That is, we can ask about what we know, what knowledge is, ...
- 12.3k
1
vote
Is Bhaskar's argument, that epistemology and ontology are separate, correct?
I will answer with an example.
There exist some interpretations of quantum mechanics. One of them is the many-worlds interpretation :
It is a philosophical position about how the mathematics used in
...
- 1,634
2
votes
Is the hallucination hypothesis always the best explanation?
Not if there is verifiable evidence for another hypothesis
First we can have a debate of what measure we use for "best".
But assuming there is any such measure, then the answer is: no, a ...
- 5,036
0
votes
Is there a theory that if something doesn't exist, it isn't...?
You are asking questions about the word 'exist' which presuppose it has a single clear-cut meaning- it doesn't. The word can be applied in different ways, and you will get into all kinds of muddles if ...
- 13.1k
1
vote
Numbers and Time
Your question reminds me of the broader one that is often mentioned on this site, asking why the Universe can be modelled by mathematics at all. I will address point 1) in your list of motivations, as ...
- 13.1k
1
vote
Numbers and Time
Time is what a clock measures. A clock is a machine that does the same process over and over and moves a pointer from one entry in an ordered set without an upper bound to the next entry in the set ...
- 3,400
0
votes
What is an object's properties?
Objects have all sorts of properties. Consider, for example: mass, length, shape, position, orientation, speed, age, dirtiness, components, history, owner, colours, value, purchase price, smell, ...
- 13.1k
0
votes
Are there any publications that attempt to give a formal ontological definition of the Christian Trinity?
Does this do it for you, sir/madam (both?)?
- 3,196
1
vote
Are there any publications that attempt to give a formal ontological definition of the Christian Trinity?
An old attempt, and relatively perspicuous at that, comes from Aquinas:
For St Thomas, the relations which distinguish the divine persons constitute these persons. Relation thus becomes the basis of ...
- 12.3k
0
votes
What's the difference between noneism and abstractionism?
A couple of thoughts: Can something that exists in the brain, whether by original thought or by influenced thought, such as reading a book or seeing a movie, be said to not really exist? When we see ...
- 1
1
vote
Accepted
How will you describe ontology of God?
If you start by the assumption that God exists, then you are talking about theology; theology studies the nature of God.
On the other hand ontology is the study of being: what "things" exist ...
- 1,634
0
votes
What's the difference between noneism and abstractionism?
The noneist seems to be varying over theories of ∃ or E, i.e. either a quantifier or a predicate, whereas the abstractionist seems to vary over a propositional operator "it is actual that..."...
- 12.3k
1
vote
What's the difference between noneism and abstractionism?
The difference is largely a matter of terminology. Where one group says that Sherlock Homes exists and the other that he does not, they are using the word 'exist' in different ways. Apart, perhaps, ...
- 13.1k
0
votes
Can any part of existence be considered as information?
I would challenge the idea that we can say 'what everything really is', ontologically, at least within the methods of science. I make the case that energy is better thought of as a kind of language to ...
- 20.5k
0
votes
What's the difference between noneism and abstractionism?
The "abstractionists" are correct. The fictional character Sherlock Holmes is often represented smoking a (fictional) pipe. Not any (fictional) pipe, mind you, but a large, iconic meerschaum ...
- 1,743
0
votes
What's the difference between noneism and abstractionism?
These two theories have different ontologies. What this means is that their entities may be different and there exist different semantics/meanings. It all depends on their definitions.
For example @Jo ...
- 1,634
Top 50 recent answers are included