5 ms·

Indeed! Abstractions deal with commonalities, and those do exist. ("There exists something in common between the three horses and the three apples you want to t

Indeed! Abstractions deal with commonalities, and those do exist. ("There exists something in common between the three horses and the three apples you want to treat the horses with.")

colechristensen 4y ago
So much of it comes down to what exactly you mean by exist. Which ultimately ends up being a boring disagreement. People can have bigger or smaller definitions of what it means and then have passionate disagreements with each other about what fits inside which are ultimately about nothing but how big a person prefers their definition.
- Koshkin 4y ago
  Sure, there are many ways in which something may not exist; but the existence usually demonstrates itself in a pretty straightforward way, like with the horse who bites you if you show her that you have no more apples left.
  - ogogmad 4y ago
    Look up intuitionistic logic and constructivism to see why existence can have a weaker or stronger meaning depending on the foundations of mathematics.
  - colechristensen 4y ago
    Then you're painting yourself as one who has a certain definition of exist and can't imagine other definitions who would participate in such discussions unwittingly about differences in definition rather than the subject matter.
    - Koshkin 4y ago
      But it is existence that is the subject matter.
      - jhanschoo 4y ago
        > but the existence usually demonstrates itself in a pretty straightforward way, like with the horse who bites you if you show her that you have no more apples left. I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but existence has many liminal cases. There's a rich tradition of ontologists trying to get at a good definition of existence.
jonnybgood 4y ago
As another comment said. What do you mean by exist? It requires a little more rigour here. Using your example: What does it mean for three horses and three apples to exist? The better question: What does it mean for three (of anything) to exist? Why not one thing, one thing, one thing? The definition of existence you appear to be using is the physical proximity of those objects. But even that can get quite hairy. If there is two apples within inches of each other and another apple 100 feet away, are there three apples or two? The answer to this question depends on what you mean by the existence of three apples.
- akomtu 4y ago
  If an apple is cut in half, does the apple still exist? When the halves are brought together, at what distance between the two does the apple start existing?
  - ffhhj 4y ago
    Tarski would like to cut that apple into thin slices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox
  - anthk 4y ago
    Is there an atomic bond? No. Then, there's no whole apple any more.
- danielam 4y ago
  > What does it mean for three horses and three apples to exist? You tell us. You seem perfectly comfortable speaking of a multiplicity of instances. (Personally, I would begin the discussion with substantial form. I can speak of many triangles that instantiate the same triangularity which allows me to assert the same properties of triangularity of them all. And yet triangularity is not to be identified with any particular triangle.)
  - Koshkin 4y ago
    This is a valuable point. Our thinking is too much tied to the language. Of course when we say that the abstract triangle exists we mean that what exists is the property of triangularity. Properties (of things) do exist, whether we like it or not. Just like the number 3, say, also exists - in the form of “threeness” property (of a collection of objects). There is not much more to be said here, except maybe that most, if not all, properties manifest themselves in, or indeed are, relations between things, and also that they are not arbitrary products of the mind, being impressed into us by the objective reality - and how can something be impressed into us that is not itself part of reality, i.e. does not exist in the most obvious sense of the word.
Barrin92 4y ago
the notion of commonality exists in the head of the observer because it's a useful fiction. (even 'the horse' itself is). But that is a subjective form of existence, what Jakob von Uexküll called one's "Umwelt" (the world as it presents itself to you). There's no reason to believe it precedes matter, or that triangles exist in a world without anyone to conceive of them. edit: there's a great talk by Daniel Dennett on the topic that luckily still is up on archive.org https://web.archive.org/web/20161125135644/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcVKxeKFCHE https://web.archive.org/web/20161125135644/https://www.youtu...
TuringTest 4y ago
> Abstractions deal with commonalities, and those do exist. Mandatory reading: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/nouning https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/nouning And this one is even better: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/real-2 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/real-2

Indeed! Abstractions deal with commonalities, and those do exist. ("There exists something in common between the three horses and the three apples you want to treat the horses with.")

colechristensen 4y ago

So much of it comes down to what exactly you mean by exist. Which ultimately ends up being a boring disagreement. People can have bigger or smaller definitions of what it means and then have passionate disagreements with each other about what fits inside which are ultimately about nothing but how big a person prefers their definition.

Koshkin 4y ago
Sure, there are many ways in which something may not exist; but the existence usually demonstrates itself in a pretty straightforward way, like with the horse who bites you if you show her that you have no more apples left.
- ogogmad 4y ago
  Look up intuitionistic logic and constructivism to see why existence can have a weaker or stronger meaning depending on the foundations of mathematics.
- colechristensen 4y ago
  Then you're painting yourself as one who has a certain definition of exist and can't imagine other definitions who would participate in such discussions unwittingly about differences in definition rather than the subject matter.
  - Koshkin 4y ago
    But it is existence that is the subject matter.
    - jhanschoo 4y ago
      > but the existence usually demonstrates itself in a pretty straightforward way, like with the horse who bites you if you show her that you have no more apples left. I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but existence has many liminal cases. There's a rich tradition of ontologists trying to get at a good definition of existence.

jonnybgood 4y ago

As another comment said. What do you mean by exist? It requires a little more rigour here. Using your example: What does it mean for three horses and three apples to exist? The better question: What does it mean for three (of anything) to exist? Why not one thing, one thing, one thing? The definition of existence you appear to be using is the physical proximity of those objects. But even that can get quite hairy. If there is two apples within inches of each other and another apple 100 feet away, are there three apples or two? The answer to this question depends on what you mean by the existence of three apples.

akomtu 4y ago
If an apple is cut in half, does the apple still exist? When the halves are brought together, at what distance between the two does the apple start existing?
- ffhhj 4y ago
  Tarski would like to cut that apple into thin slices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox
- anthk 4y ago
  Is there an atomic bond? No. Then, there's no whole apple any more.
danielam 4y ago
> What does it mean for three horses and three apples to exist? You tell us. You seem perfectly comfortable speaking of a multiplicity of instances. (Personally, I would begin the discussion with substantial form. I can speak of many triangles that instantiate the same triangularity which allows me to assert the same properties of triangularity of them all. And yet triangularity is not to be identified with any particular triangle.)
- Koshkin 4y ago
  This is a valuable point. Our thinking is too much tied to the language. Of course when we say that the abstract triangle exists we mean that what exists is the property of triangularity. Properties (of things) do exist, whether we like it or not. Just like the number 3, say, also exists - in the form of “threeness” property (of a collection of objects). There is not much more to be said here, except maybe that most, if not all, properties manifest themselves in, or indeed are, relations between things, and also that they are not arbitrary products of the mind, being impressed into us by the objective reality - and how can something be impressed into us that is not itself part of reality, i.e. does not exist in the most obvious sense of the word.

Barrin92 4y ago

the notion of commonality exists in the head of the observer because it's a useful fiction. (even 'the horse' itself is). But that is a subjective form of existence, what Jakob von Uexküll called one's "Umwelt" (the world as it presents itself to you). There's no reason to believe it precedes matter, or that triangles exist in a world without anyone to conceive of them. edit: there's a great talk by Daniel Dennett on the topic that luckily still is up on archive.org https://web.archive.org/web/20161125135644/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcVKxeKFCHE https://web.archive.org/web/20161125135644/https://www.youtu...

TuringTest 4y ago

> Abstractions deal with commonalities, and those do exist. Mandatory reading: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/nouning https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/nouning And this one is even better: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/real-2 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/real-2