[FOM] Is CH vague?

[laureano luna]

Joe Shipman wrote:

>Martin, I agree that those who would argue that CH
>is vague ought 
>identify which of the simpler concepts you
>identified are vague. 
>However, my understanding is that we are discussing
>a slightly 
>different question, whether CH is "definite".
>
>Indefinite and vague are not the same. "Whether
>Sherlock Holmes had 
>blue eyes" may be indefinite if Conan Doyle's
>stories don't anwer it, 
>but it is not vague. "Whether X is a great
>mathematician" is a vague 
>predicate, but that does not prevent it from being
>definite when 
>X=Archimedes or when X=Britney Spears.

The question about the eyes of Holmes seems ultimately
wrongly worded. The color of Holmes's eyes depended on
Conan Doyle's will; it is a question of artistic
creation. So the question about that color should be
re-worded as the question about whether Conan Doyle
described that color and, if so, how he did it. But if
we re-word it and pose: did Conan Doyle described
Holmes's eyes as blue? There is surely one definite
true answer to the question.

Is the question about CH similarly ill-worded? If so,
who is the creator of CH's biography? Whose is CH the
fictional creation? It depends on the will of whom?
Cantor's? Is it a question of copyright?

I don't think Holmes and CH are comparable topics. If
we agree on this, all we can require from CH in order
to accept it as a definite question is that it be not
vague.

I dare say that if we grant that reals and the set of
all reals are not mere fiction characters, CH should
be accepted as a definite and not vague question.


Laureano Luna



       
______________________________________________ 
¿Con Mascota por primera vez? Sé un mejor Amigo. Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas http://es.answers.yahoo.com/info/welcome