Dialog with Jeff Williams: Intermission
This is a continuation with the dialog between Jeff Williams and I. Jeff asked:
Having written the first three (of five) parts, I think I've answered everything except "the limits of the invariability principles." To do that, I have to finish the posts on "meaning" and "math," then ruminate on the nature of infinity and its relationship to nature (a small part of the latter is here, but I also have some unpublished material on that, too).
Since I think I've answered all but the last (and I have every reason to believe that I can answer the last, but with a lot more exposition), I'm going to take a break to take time to mentally recharge before working on the next two parts.
Jeff can now attempt to rebut.
Table of Contents
I would ask you to demonstrate why reason is an atomic arrangement, and why it being a part of nature would imply truth; and along with that how you would explain erroneous ideas and the limits of the invariability principles.
Having written the first three (of five) parts, I think I've answered everything except "the limits of the invariability principles." To do that, I have to finish the posts on "meaning" and "math," then ruminate on the nature of infinity and its relationship to nature (a small part of the latter is here, but I also have some unpublished material on that, too).
Since I think I've answered all but the last (and I have every reason to believe that I can answer the last, but with a lot more exposition), I'm going to take a break to take time to mentally recharge before working on the next two parts.
Jeff can now attempt to rebut.
Table of Contents
- Jeff's original post
- Intro to my reply
- Part I to my reply
- Part IIa to my reply
- Part IIb to my reply
- Part III to my reply
- Intermission to my reply
blog comments powered by Disqus