[FRIAM] Dogs, Computers, Joy

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

Predicativism: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philosophy-mathematics/#Pre

Your before and after is the same as up and down. It's the *unification* into a definite (http://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/whatsdef.pdf) construct that's problematic.

On 7/28/20 12:03 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> You are pushing me hard, here, but I think the up/down thang is orthogonal to the predicativist position.  (You invented that word, right?)  We Predicativists need only assert that there is a before and after: i.e., BEFORE we can say whether a thing is, we have to have said, up front, what it would be for that thing to be.  We can take it back soon as we see where it leads.  

-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ