Are there mathematical objects.......? Is this a trivial question or not? A more general question raises the underlying issue...... are there abstract objects?
Go to the SEP entry on abstract objects. You will see that it is a convoluted question, having many aspects. Among the questions raised is whether or not numbers are objects. Nay, I'll make it simpler for you....... do numbers exist? This is a decidedly non-trivial philosophical issue, having, yes, many aspects.
Then consider physicalism/mathmaticism..... all reality can be reduced to number. What then is the status of reality? Is the Moon real? Does the Moon exist as an object unto itself, or are all objects irreducibly relational?
It gets complicated..... a veritable Gordian knot. Let's try something slightly less convoluted...... the normativity of meaning, also in the SEP.......
Right off the bat, we get the chicken and egg problem..... which came first....... content or meaning? Who knows?
Hey, look ma, I'm a normativist........ intentional content is essentially normative. Which to my chicken little mind is just to state the obvious..... intentional content is essentially intentional. Is there any content that is otherwise?
I think I've already got the hang of this....... how does the Moon's existence differ from that of a number? That should be obvious, you say. Well, if it's so darned obvious, then explain it.....
In the end, after much shouting, both the Moon and a number exist only as intentional objects. IOW, they exist only relative to sapient subjects. But, wait, you say, we can prove that tides existed before humans. Wonderful, I say, but so what? You are speaking of deep time, which abstraction exists only conceptually, relative to a culture of conceptualists.
According to relationalism, there exists no objective differences. All difference is a matter of degree, and, therefore, of abstraction. There are no abstract objects, only intentional objects. Intentionalism is a paper bag that you cannot punch your way out of. Sorry.
And, while we're on a problem solving spree, I believe that I've solved the Sham problem. I finally have his number. To be anti-Christian is to be an anti-communalist. For there to be communities, there must be an interpersonal structure..... an infrastructure, if you will.
Shamans/mystics are notoriously anarchistic, unless, possibly, they exist in an ashram. Only then might they be cajoled into doing the dishes. Otherwise, they end up on the street. I believe in dishes, therefore I believe in Jesus. In the end, it's that simple, Sham. Talk your way out of that one.
There are only two kinds of anti-Christians..... materialists and mystics. Both are only solipsists of one sort or another. Then there are Jews and Muslims. Problem solved...... just ask any Jew whether they'd rather be living in a Christian society or a Muslim society. Any more questions? I don't think so. That pretty much wraps it up. Yes, sports fans?
But, wait, Neil Armstrong stood on the Moon. No one will ever be able to stand on the number two, no matter how many rockets we build. Is that not an objective difference? Hmmm........
Wait again....... I stand on two legs. I cannot eat green, but I can eat green vegetables. What's the difference? This is another philosophical puzzle..... bundle theory, David Hume......
Bundle theory, originated by the 18th century Scottish philosopher David Hume, is the ontological theory about objecthood in which an object consists only of a collection (bundle) of properties, relations or tropes. ... In particular, there is no substance in which the properties are inherent.
IOW, your teeth are fine, but, unfortunately, the gums will have to be removed. Yes, Virginia, there is a Moon, but, in the end, it's only a bundle of properties.
How can someone stand on a bundle of properties? I sure don't know, but we do it every day. There just ain't no there, there. That's all. Or, more to the point, we can do it in our dreams.
So, hmmm...... let's see.... therefore.... portals exist, and trump is an idiot, like a fox..... or something like that.
Will Donald Trump come to the Cabin in the Woods? Does it matter? Not so much, I could argue.
The Princess and I need an agenda for the CiW...... Well, the main event would be a live YouTube text-in show. I said to the Princess that there will only be two things on people's minds...... the portal and the president. The portal, as I understand it, is less objective than the president. There is less there, there, as if that were possible.
Is truth political? Of course, it is/isn't. I think we've mostly established that the truth is intersubjective, or quasi-political. But, as with Sham, intersubjective means nothing without an infrastructure. So..... pick one. Virtually, by default, it's this one, and, for the last couple of years, donny has been touted, in this regard. After the fact, it's all by default. I've already said, he's de-facto in charge..... no question...... he doesn't even have to show up. It goes without saying. Yes?
I mean, just based on the seven', you could write a letter to the pres..... it's eleven o'clock, do you know where your children are? I mean, really. Maybe footman is working at the dollar store. I sure don't know otherwise.
But does it make any difference? If the monad wanted, there could be a portal at ground zero. It even feels like there is one, already. There is even a metaphysical hole in the SEP that's big enough to drive a truck through, as just demonstrated. The only reason we don't see it is because we're collectively fearful of what's behind the green door. Nah, more than that, we're afraid of what's between our neighbor's ears. Who knows what demon might pop out his head, when he hears about the door.
There could be a portal in the middle of your head. In fact, we've proven that there is just based on intentionality. Can computers simulate intentionality? Of course, they can. Can they emulate it? That's the problem. Strong AI people can't tell the difference between simulation and emulation. What's worse is that they don't think there can be a difference.... nah, they say there _cannot_ be a difference. I mean, puhleeese. These materialists get away with murder. The reason they do is because no one knows how to make a federal case out of it. The philosophers will write papers about it until the cows come home. Will anyone else pay attention? Will donny pay attention?
That's how the coverup has worked all these years..... attention has to start somewhere, and with a problem this big, it has to start at the top. No problem. If it can be arranged, it has been arranged, if anything can be arranged. What could possibly be more critical? But is it still too early, or is it too late? Time has come. That's all.
The pres is in the loop. How not? It's impossible not to be. It's been the starting assumption, from the start. We take it from there. It's like taking candy from a baby. People object. They complain. They'll just have to take their complaints to the White House.
Is this just a simulated portal? Or is it emulated? Is there a difference? Ironically, there may not be a difference, especially in the case of portals. It's all dreamland/dreamtime anyway. Yes?
Well, then, why don't we all have portals in our backyards? Because we already have them between our ears. They would be redundant.
All we need now is the off ramp, right off of I95. Would one of those actuators work? The problem, as we've said, is more with city hall. Once we get over this hump, once we get over the viral hump, we'll be good to go. That's my estimation. Well, maybe the hump is more personal. That's why it's been so hard to pin down..... to objectify.
Most of the potential audience for the YouTube show will want to hear about the president and/or the portal. The Princess has allowed me to believe that she knows more about both than she has told me. I am given the impression that the YouTube show is intended to have some novel content relative to both issues, over and above what has already been posted to YouTube. This is what I need to ascertain from the Princess.