tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post5349949204484413..comments2023-10-08T15:51:17.426+00:00Comments on Beyond Necessity: The nonexistentEdward Ockhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-66513829534120250262011-01-08T17:08:58.042+00:002011-01-08T17:08:58.042+00:00>>After all, it holds of the sentences of (s...>>After all, it holds of the sentences of (some) fictional works. <br /><br />I agree, in the sense that 'a horse can fly' is equivalent to 'a flying horse exists'. But both are false, in one sense. The sense in which they are true, such as in 'Sam Weller worked for Mr Pickwick' or 'there are no lower class characters in Jane Austen' is difficult, and out of scope for the moment I am afraid.Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-3122737595708051212011-01-08T14:05:41.540+00:002011-01-08T14:05:41.540+00:00Sad, I agree. BV can be a petulant fellow at time...Sad, I agree. BV can be a petulant fellow at times. Perhaps we can continue here.<br /><br />I concur in the Brentano equivalence but I think it's a mistake to tie it so tightly to existence in the actual world. After all, it holds of the sentences of (some) fictional works. It's a necessary condition of our describing fictional worlds as 'logically consistent'. This is my argument from 'symmetry' which I hope you'll find time to address at some point. A large proportion of our thought is of the past, the future, the possible, and the imaginary. I agree that it's all a-referential. The problem is to explain how it's all so meaningful for us.David Brightlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06757969974801621186noreply@blogger.com