I’ve included three posts I particularly like in this week’s summary:
The first, ‘On semantic ambiguity in Anselm of Canterbury’s argument for God’s existence‘, asks the question ‘just how many readings of St Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of God are there’. Based on ambiguities in the argument’s minor premise alone, I show that there are at least ten.
The second, ‘On logical fallacies employed in the philosophical use of the term ‘tautology’‘ shows that philosophical invocations of the term play on two ambiguities in the term itself. The first justifies the fallacious inference from a statement’s being true by meaning to its being uninformative. The second justifies the mistaken conclusion that claims of existence and claims of meaning are distinct in kind, and hence not inferrable from each other.
The final post, ‘Object-oriented programming objects aren’t objects‘, argues that a common analogy used to compare the objects of programming languages like C# and Java to real-world objects breaks down rather quickly. Instead, I show that programming objects are actually closer to to the philosophical account of objects found in Leibnizian monads than they are to objects as commonly understood.