Message from @•Luke•
Discord ID: 633519376288710666
OMG YOU ARE A FAKE FUN
the mask of light
thats the first movie
the toa of light
’’ According to it, semantic anti-realism is
incoherent since semantic notions are presupposed in the very statement of the
thesis, as much as in the whole debate between realists and anti-realists.
Boghossian ´s conclusion is that a realistic, though non-naturalistic, stance
towards semantic content is necessary –namely, it should be non-contingently
adopted.’’ , ’’there is no reason to accept Boghossian´s argument, which
we find flawed. From the premise that the semantic anti-realist has to use
language to state her thesis and express her disagreement with the realist, it
does not follow that she has to subscribe to the realist´s terms: what she is
presupposing is that there is an alternative explanation of what she is doing,
which does not appeal to substantial reference and truth –it may be even a
purely physical phenomenon, fully accountable in neurological terms, or a
completely pragmatic one. So, there is no reason to think that the thesis that
there is a level of semantic content that has to be accounted for in terms of
reference and truth is itself a necessary truth’’ The Problem of living a philosophical life without object naturalism @Deleted User What do you think of this defence of semantic irrealism?
im not going in there talk later