2 ms·
And why shouldn't we go with the convenient linguistic shorthand instead of the esoteric ontological argument?
by treis 4y ago
And why shouldn't we go with the convenient linguistic shorthand instead of the esoteric ontological argument?
- dragonwriter 4y ago> And why shouldn't we go with the convenient linguistic shorthand Who said you shouldn't? The shorthand is convenient. But it doesn't mean what other statements with the same shape mean. A thing which isn't doesn't have a state or representation.