Is the fact that P possesses each of its properties a property of P? Wouldn't that, then, become a Pn+1, leading to infinite properties of P, thus making it impossible to enumerate every property that P possesses? (As an aside, consider the fact that the statement "P contains all of P's properties" is a tautology.)
P0 = P is red.
P1 = P is round.
...
Pn = P is heavy.
Pn+1 = P contains (P0,P1,Pn)
Pn+2 = P contains (P0,P1,Pn,Pn+1)
Pn+3 = P contains (P0,P1,Pn,Pn+1,Pn+2)
...
Pn+n = P contains (P0,P1,Pn,Pn+1,Pn+2,Pn+(n-1))
I'm thinking this is a grammatical mishap, rather than a conceptual flaw...
posted by onceuponapriori at 5:40 م
On Luck...
One of the purposes of philosophy is to examine the common claims made by men. One of these claims fits the form:
"Paul(P) is lucky."
I believe that, for the statement to have any meaning, it should be interpreted as such:
"Up until now, the events that occured have happened to turn out in P's favor, at least as far as we can tell."
Even reading it in this form yields only trivial information. This information could possibly be used to predict certain currently existing properties of P, but not to predict any of the future properties of P. There is no rational reason to assume that, as a result of P's past experiences, P's future experiences that are causally unrelated should end up yielding similar results.
posted by onceuponapriori at 2:42 م
Concerning the logical impossibility of time not beginning...
This is the time line posited by a naturalist who assumes that time, in this universe, has no beginning:
<---------nA---------------------nB---nC-nNow
Now, the point nC was the instant before you read this. Notice that, as a result of the line continuing infinitely backwards, the time between the 'start' of the line and nC is already infinite and then, AFTER an infinite amount of time has passed, we arrive in the present (nNow). That is obviously illogical and contradictory; an infinite amount of time could not have already passed.
I noticed that my original timeline, below, was not as clear as it should be (thanks Rafael).
posted by onceuponapriori at 2:24 م
