/lit/ - Literature

>>18306094
here are many things we cannot know and we should not make unwarranted statements of certainty. I think it is foolish to claim, like Dan Brown did, that science (whatever that is) can only ever give us inescapable knowledge of the nature of reality. As Daniel Dennett said once, we have no way of knowing which laws of nature govern what we call reality, we can only make statements about what is interesting to study, and then build a theory about it.

>>18303824
>I meant the brand. When the ferrari accountant is doing the books, how much should they assign to "owning the brand ferrari". There isn't a market where everyone is buying and selling the brand ferrari.
Obviously the dealer network is, but the dealer network is quite dilapidated right now and I have no idea how much the Ferrari CEO pays himself.

Also, isn't the brand Ferrari already dilapidated? How many "Ferrari" Ferraris would it take to change its brand? Two or three cars out of every million? Maybe five? Well, if that's the case, the Ferrari brand has at least the same dilapidation as the term "Genus Senses".

>It is scientific in the sense of the 19th century, i.e. positivism, not in today's sense.


A "concept" in this sense is a statement that refers to some single thing in the world.

It describes a relation.

For example, the concept of "diabetes" may describe the way in which blood glucose levels in the body cause or cause problems in regulating blood-sugar levels in the body.

Therefore, a concept is not the same as a set of ideas or facts; it is a description of relationships that involves a relation or relation principle.