RE: virus: Re: Social Metaphysics

Tim Rhodes (
Sat, 27 Sep 1997 13:12:07 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 26 Sep 1997, David McFadzean wrote:

> My mistake. I didn't mean that objective reality is consistent, I meant
> that true isosemantic[1] statements about objective reality are consistent.

Very good, I can now agree with you without qualification!

> [1] New word, meaning that the meaning of words doesn't change from one
> statement to the next. For example here is an apparent contradiction:
> 1. This man is blue.
> 2. This man is not blue.
> The statements are not isosemantic if they refer to different men, or if
> "blue" in the first sentence means the man is depressed while "blue"
> refers to the color blue in the second sentence.

Also good! "Isosemantic" I like the word. It may help clarify things in
the future.

-Prof. Tim