Re: There is no logic here (Was: Quine's "Word & Object")

On 03/23/2025 08:44 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On 23/03/2025 16:19, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 03/23/2025 06:49 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On 23/03/2025 03:46, Ross Finlayson wrote:

>

Sort of like W.H.F. Barnes or R.G. Collingwood, yet really for
both Kant and Hegel, who both had both a strong analytical
and thoroughly idealistic course, has that Quine's wrestling
with concepts of logical paradox, never sees him quite win,
which can only result from resolving them.

>
I do have given you a/the resolution, then you keep calling
*me* an/the idealist.  Indeed, if all you have is a/that
hammer, ideally then materially, *and* not giving it up.
>

Thanks for your reply, and please explain how there can be
a true theory overall at all, vis-a-vis some ideal Comenius
language and our mere human inter-subjective Coleridge language,
that there is one at all results from plain reason.

>
You are welcome.  The short answer there is: your question
is as ill-founded as your "philosophy" (your dictionary and
index); indeed, who said Logic is about "ultimate truth(s?)"?
>
Related: what is Philosophy?
>
-Julio
>

Well, for a sort of, "cyclic metaphysics", is that for a
theory altogether, there either is or isn't the metaphysics,
and the idea is that the metaphysics is a word and so it
does exist then that the, Ding-an-Sich, as it were, Kant's
"thing in itself", is a sort of extra-ordinary theory,
that mathematically then is for extra-ordinary infinites,
that reflect _inversion_ instead of _contradiction_ since
all of logic can be built in a principle of _inversion_
instead of _contradiction_ to satisfy a satisfying
"Principle of Sufficient Reason".
Then, indeed it's "A Theory" that is the goal, then
as with regards to a _technical_ philosophy, if that
and the word "mathematics" were Pythagorean, being _rational_,
after reason the rationality, I'm not much asking a question
as saying there's an answer.
"Logic" can be finger-counting or business-processes or
other mundane, transient nothings, there's logic in it,
whatever "is" the causality vis-a-vis magic which is not,
then "The Logic" in "A Theory" is must be, "true", Es muss sein.
The "cyclic metaphysics" is that logicist positivism saw a
strong rejection of metaphysics, yet the only way it can
justify itself or for verum and certum is to have another
one, I consider these things in my podcasts, for example
about circulus virtus instead of circulus vitiosis.
So, "who said logic is about ultimate truths", well,
that's sort of its definition.  Usually that's ascribed
to Platonism, technical.  Here "technical" means formal
and not necessarily nominalist, i.e., realist.