The Half-life of Facts.

Again, you're hesitating between the false and the true but trivial... The version you just gave us is the trivial one, but when Set challenges you to explain "whence humanity", you go into time being in the eye of the beholder and ****.

Btw, can I acknowledge any reality when I'm dead?

"Dead" implies cessation of the functionality of an "I" to negotiate reality. "What matters" is no longer defined.

That's why I asked that question. A bit tongue in cheek, though..

Thx, although they are not "my comments"; rather they are my summaries of points made by different posters. E.g. the inherent contradiction (point 3) was spotted by Parados if memory serves.

Speaking as a frog, what is a dead fly ?....and what is reality?...and what do you mean by anywhere ?

I could pull that one out, but how could you?

Je croake, tu croakes, il croake .....c'est facile !

If the dead fly exists...it is a part of REALITY whether you are a frog or not, Fresco.

But what does exist mean ? Do you mean "related to" as in "we frogs existed as tadpoles".

Ah non! En français, la grenouille coasse.

Pas en angleterre ! Nous avons les gorges formidables !

I'll do a deal with you Frank. You explain to me what "a dead fly" is, and I'll tell you what a "gringe" is.

Language is not reality. It is merely a way that humans attempt to communicate about their surroundings.

A chair is not simply a place to sit. It is many things. It can be a place to sit, something to block a door so it can't be opened or a place to set one's coat. I don't need language to understand any of those things. I only need language when I attempt to relate it to someone that can't actually see it. I don't need language to decide to place my coat on a chair. I can simply visualize a coat on the chair. The only reason I need language is to tell you about it. The picture in my mind is all I need and it doesn't require language at all.

Animals clearly have a sense of "reality." They have expectations and communicate about those expectations but don't require language to do so.

You are simply playing word games. "Exist" is simply a human word. It wouldn't even be understood by over half of humanity alive today simply because it is an English word.

Whether frogs have memories of being tadpoles, I don't know and I would hazard a guess that neither do you. You seem to be making an argument that failure to understand language means that frogs somehow can't perceive a reality. That is simply wrong.

If you have to ask that question, Fresco...you are in the wrong forum.

If the dead fly exists...it is part of REALITY.

Get over whatever else you are trying to deal with.

If I have to explain to you what a dead fly is...you would probably not be able to get it. So I will have to pass with gringe.

You know in what category of philosophers I see Fresco fit in Frank ? Le bon vivent type, a middle aged dandy that reads Le Monde diplomatique in the mornings and delights himself upon vague concepts while indulging in some red wine in the evenings...Fresco is a landscape gazer in love with his own libertarian philosophy, found of lecturing new believers freshly arrived in his congregation...a place where students are guests in his house of wisdom...to my view he should have taken poetry and literature for company without having philosophy in the mix, it sounds he would have far more friends.
I like him but I would like him better ad the distinction been there.

Ostensibly good points from a conventional realist perspective. However, Benjamin Lee Whorf would ask you whether you could even "think" these comments without human language. In case you hadn't worked it out I'm playing Devils advocate to Frank's nonsense. So I'm not "simply playing word games". I'm underscoring Cyr's point that what we call "reality" is species specific insofar as it is a function of our perceptual apparatus. The fact that humans are able to invent transducers to enhance our physiological apparatus does not explain the nature of subsequent observations without reference to a shifting epistemological paradigm .

I'll tell that one to my local philosophy group over our Christmas meal. They like a good laugh !

So you are the "Santa" in the group eh ? It makes sense...