The bank that likes to say YES!

Innocent times, and, to add insult to injury…this was made during Thatcherism!!

I just talked to Antisophie earlier,

She says that my writing is really soppy…I should be ashamed of myself; well the words she used was; “you write like a teenage girl!”

Possibly the most hurtful remark I could ever hear! That bitch…


Ontological status

My recent thoughts has led a discussion between myself and Destre…

What are the ontological status’ of theoretical entities that differ discourse specific?

1. Physics: necessary concepts vs. dispensable concepts; useful vs. necesary fiction; unobserably true vs. observably false; unfalsifiable for truth conditions vs. exempt from truth conditions
2. Mathematics (axioms); setting the conditions of truth, or truth-apt propositions? Truth-bearing vs. truth-conferring?
3. Chemistry/Biology – dispensable concepts; if our catalogue of natural kinds change; does our structuration of them change? Two questions here to distinguish

3.a. Does specific components of our structuration, namely in the rules of construal of kinds change?
3.b. Does the fact that there is a structure remain the same?

Following Korner on Transcendental arguments, the test for the psychological necessity is to conceive, or pose the following: Is it possible to theorise such entities without a structure that lies systematic or schematic? (while prima facie this seems a valid and important question; ti also seems to me a pseudoquestion; for the entities cannot be entities without the underlying structure…but I need to show this fact)


Explanations of what?

It is a legitimate question to explain: “how do we explain the legitimacy of counterfactuals?”
Is it a legitimate question to ask: “where does necessity come from?”

It is a legitimate question to ask a of something within the discourse of physics “how is it that such and such a thing, has such and such a modification/action, when entered into such and such a change of condition”; we could appeal to causality, dispositions, properties…
Is it a legitimate question to ask “what caused causation?”, or “what is the property of property?”, “what necessitates necessity?” (tangentially, I think asking ‘how are possibles possible’ is a valid question outright)