Re: A pk is *both* a physical and a logical object.

"Jan Hidders" <hidders_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1184860573.502673.208300_at_g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> On 13 jul, 16:54, "Brian Selzer" <br..._at_selzer-software.com> wrote:

>
> I don't see a distinction between "can be" and "can be true", for me
> those are synonymous. Perhaps you meant "is" and "can be"? Note that
> the UoD is anything you might want to talk about, and therefore
> usually describes what "can be" and not just "what is".
>

So, what you're saying is that existence is identical to truth?

>> > So you meant static constraints? Why do you think those would not be
>> > part of the description of the UoD?
>>
>> I was thinking more along the lines of relation schemata, which can be
>> represented either by open sentences in first order logic (which if
>> included
>> as part of the description of the universe would mean that that
>> description
>> is incomplete) or by contingent sentences in quantified modal logic. In
>> either case an assignment is required to obtain what is actually true
>> about
>> their referents, and by extension, about the universe.

>
> Why restrict yourself only to those logics? Anyway, all that is part
> of the UoD.
>

>
> That is by definition also part of the UoD.
>
> -- Jan Hidders
>