humanities.philosophy.objectivism

"Mark N" wrote in message
news:hpo.20080324234801$672a@news.killfile.org...
> David Schwartz wrote:
>
>> No, you take away that it was part of the Sun. It still is just as it
>> was before, it's just not part of the Sun anymore.
>
> Of course it would still be part of the Sun! Or at least, it wouldn't
> *stop* being part of the Sun just because of some change in the way we use
> words or the way we define concepts.
>
> Saying that something is part of the Sun means that it is part of [what
> *we* mean by "the Sun" *now*].

I find it somewhat amusing/ironic that this needs to be explained to
someone outside a kindergarten or a loony ward.

YMMV.

Matt
--
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")