Philosophy Now Forum

Sorry I just edit my post to correct my typing error. (see bold) You can't use deduction to prove that "all inductive inferences are unjustified". And if you use induction your argument is self-defeating.

You can't use deduction to prove that "all inductive inferences are unjustified". And if you use induction your argument is self-defeating.

So is something without parts not an object? No. You might be right, but if the things that make components always have components, are there no fundamental components? I can't imagine an object without parts. Even if you can't, even in principle, split it you can always divide it geometrically inf...

tillingborn wrote:

brain in a vat wrote: In order for something to be an object it's parts must be connected.

So is something without parts not an object?

No.

What are the necessary conditions for something to be an object? I hope to provide a satisfactory answer by the end of this post. An example of creating an object might illuminate us. Take a bunch of ingredients for a cake, for example. Are all these separate ingredients a single object? Obviously n...

If water = H2O then I can substitute the word "water" with the word "H2O" and it will be truth preserving. P1: John believes that he is drinking water. P2: Water = H2O. C: Therefore John believes that he is drinking H2O. But it's possible for John to believe that he is drinking w...