RE: [jboske] factivity of nu

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

John:
> Invent Yourself scripsit:
> 
> > No good! There is only one reality, all others are (equally) unreal 
> > President McGovern, Irish Socrates, and the one where I drank hot
> > chocolate last night are all equally false. The Verification Principle
> > shows this 
> 
> How?
> 
> You really see no difference between the you-drank-hot-chocolate world
> and the 2 + 2 = 5 (or worse yet, 2 + 2 = Albert) worlds, or the world
> where all universals are false, or the world where all false statements
> are true?

I think that's the wrong distinction. Those worlds are impossible,
because they violate transuniversal principles (that is, they violate
facts that are independent of particular worlds).

Oh I see: you *did* mean this distinction, as a response to what xod
said. But let me point out for clarity's sake that the potential/imaginary
distinction is a distinction among worlds that are not impossible.

I doubt I can persuade xod to accept any of that, though, except by
pointing out that it is an ontology that many people would like to
be able to express, even if xod finds it deluded.

--And.