4 ms·
Your conclusion doesn't follow your premise. Whether it's still an apple is a question of categorisation and a human construct (1). But once it's established it
by pcwelder 6y ago
Your conclusion doesn't follow your premise. Whether it's still an apple is a question of categorisation and a human construct (1). But once it's established it is indeed an Apple you can count the number of such Apples.
Counting is real and the number you count is "true" because it leads to real predictions. This tale of magic bucket is enlightening. (2)
(1): https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/aMHq4mA2PHSM2TMoH/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/aMHq4mA2PHSM2TMoH/the-catego...
(2): https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/X3HpE8tMXz4m4w6Rz/the-simple-truth https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/X3HpE8tMXz4m4w6Rz/the-simple...
- GoblinSlayer 6y agoThere are different ways to understand reality. For spacial understanding we have cartesian and euclidean models, the former suggests reality is digital, the latter suggests reality is analog, both give real predictions, both are true? For temporal understanding we have declarative and imperative models, the former suggests infinity exists, the latter doesn't, both give real predictions, both are true?
- teucris 6y agoIt seems you may have misunderstood my conclusion. All I meant to posit was exactly as you state: > Whether it’s still an apple is a question of categorisation and a human construct