New answers tagged

1

Well, the short answer to this question is that you shouldn't be using these terms at all without access to some medium-sized grains of salt. Fact, Truth, and Reality are colloquial terms more than analytical ones, and while they have their uses we can't let them get away from us. For instance, what you've called a 'fact' would be much better described as ...


4

One way to interpret this might be to say that metaphysics could, in principle, discuss the realms of what is merely "possible", as well as those things and facts that are "actual". We can speak of things that are actually the case, but we also seem to be able to speak of alternative possibilities. I'm not actually throwing this laptop I'm typing on, but I ...


2

You’re assuming that simulation is a philosophically coherent category. It’s not. Few philosophers have taken up Bostroms notion of a simulation as a philosophically coherent thought. It’s science-fiction dressed up as philosophy, and for we know, that’s where Bostrom got the idea from.


0

There is an art to time and an art to space. These are the canvas in which reality plays out. The problem with the idea that a "subset of discrete mathematics tools, which in turn rely on data structures of a fixed or maximum size." is that there is no fixed or maximum size. Godel's incompleteness theorem states that you can't prove a system within the ...


0

Why do we expect symmetry? Because we see symmetry all around us: human faces have bilateral symmetry, as are their bodies; so are trees, and the leaves on trees show symmetry too. Since symmetry is all around us we get to expect it. Moreover, one can argue, that there is a metaphysical necessity of such, since a world without symmetry of any kind, would ...


Top 50 recent answers are included