An essential property is a type of property means the noun must have its essential property or it loses its name.
An accidental property is a type of property means a noun can lose its accidental properties and it still have its name.
E.g. The essential property of a triangle is “has three sides.” If it gains a side then it becomes a quadrilateral. The essential property of carbon is “has six protons”. If it gains a proton then it becomes nitrogen. The essential property of a father is: “has a son.”
A condition is a type of accidental property and a type of noun means a noun has an accidental property which is condition x and x must have an essential property or it loses its name. EOR - state = condition
E.g. The sun is in the condition of being cloudy. Being cloudy is a noun and it must have certain essential properties in order to get its name. Or I am in the condition of being sick. Being sick is one of my accidental properties. If I am healthy I still have my essential property which is philosopher but to be sick, sickness itself must have an essential property such as causes someone to feel bad.
I think the essential property of a father is “has a child” (i.e., at least one).
Edit: In fact, that’s only one of the essential properties of a father. The other is “is male” (or at least was male when giving life to at least one child (which is still alive)).
True, some nouns must have several essential properties.
Are there good and bad names? Like, can I name myself “Hungry Uccisore” and boom, some of my accidental properties become essential?
You’re confusing common name with proper name.
If a noun loses its essential property it loses its common name and does not lose its proper name.
So let’s say your essential property is philosopher. If you stopped posting in this forum and stopped reading and writing philosophy would lose the common name philosopher but would not lose the name murderer
Murderer?
A condition is a proposition on which another proposition’s truth value rests.
A conditioner is a product that you put in your hair after a shampoo to ensure that it’s shiny and full of bounce and what not.
A conditional is a statement that usually takes the form of an “if/then”.
A conditionographer is a person who documents the conditions under which things exist.
A conditionstitution indoctrinates people to a slave morality which is a result of those people being under the condition of inferiority. This phenomenon baffles conditionographers to this very day. Givin up freedom voluntarily and what have you. Crazy shit man.
uccisore means murderer in italian
Yea, condition also has that meaning. Of course I did not say condition only has such and such meaning.
Well if and only if you didn’t say that then we’re cool so far.
But for real there’s a lot more to doing these little word puzzle things here than you’ve shown, and it should be pointed out that the closer you get to a perfect system, the farther you get from dealing with the real, novel objects that make up the world. Just sayin dog…it’s good to study a map sometimes, but don’t stare at it and only it for so long that you don’t recognize the highway and the trees and what have you when you finally decide to look up at reality.
How much do you want to bet that in 10 days I will have a perfect system? I bet 50 dollars. We can put it some paypal account and paypal will agree to release it when the moderator determines who wins the debate. Faust seems to be a rather clear-headed moderator. Let’s let him be the judge of the contest. I’m not challenging you to a debate I’m just saying that I have a perfect system and that we will agree on the rules of what a perfect system is and Faust will determine if the rules have been followed.
Dude, agreeing on rules and then putting the pieces together can give you some kind of system that adheres to those rules. If you define perfect as adhering to those rules without exception, then I got a whole can of worms for ya. If you say that there are minor exceptions but that the relevant factors are all properly in place and that the ones that aren’t are an accident, then I got an even bigger can of worms. Both those scenarios entail me accepting from the jump that a perfect system is one that’s simply internally consistent and consistent with the analytically necessary axioms upon which it rests.
Even if you get one of those kinds of systems, I’m still going to point out that a system that’s only virtues are internal consistency and adherence to it’s own axioms is one that can literally say nothing about anything other than itself. Has anyone ever used the term “vacuous” in a discussion about logic while you were present?
But why would my essential property be philosopher? Why wouldn’t it be video-game player or glutton or brunette or whatever? It it just a language thing- for the purposes of this or that conversation, my essential property is whatever we need it to be, or are you making an existential claim?
I don’t think there are essences. I think the closest you can get to an essence is a bundle of properties that may or may not be arranged in some novel way.