Quote:
Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ
That's exactly the point I was making in regard to other concepts.
|
I'm sure it was, and I can't see how it can be right. It seems as if you're saying that electrons don't have a charge, because charge is a property and not an entity; that the surface of the sun doesn't have a temperature, because temperature is a property; that mammals don't lactate, because lactation is a function and not a thing. And when we strip away all the properties from things, then we are left with bare thingishness with no properties. And I don't see how we could even say that such a formless entity could even exist.
Bill Stoddard
Edit: It seems that you accept my formulation about the consistent behavior of entities existing out there, in nature, but the law that describes it existing in our minds. But then, if you think that the properties of things exist in our minds, what, if anything, do you think exists out there in nature?