From: "Jukka Laari" <jlaari-AT-dodo.jyu.fi> Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 00:56:04 EET+200 Subject: M-TH: re:re: non-identity? I decided to wait 24 hours but what the hell: exactly what fallacy there is (forgot the name of it) in this definition: "To be is to be the value of a variable." Can't Quine any better? (still think it's fabulous) > > That's absolutely fabulous: "To be is to be the value of a variable." > > Too bad it doesn't say a thing about the difference between 'being' > > and 'existence'... > > Sure it does. It says there is no difference. Huh? Well well... you must be joking... Just rushing home, back tomorrow Jukka --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005