On Hell and Forgiveness

[RoadRunner79]

Why do you think that the law of identity is not thought through very well?  It would seem that without it; we cannot have a rational conversation. Tree is a language concept as well.

As Neo pointed out, you seem to be assuming the answer to your question in your argument (that if you cannot observe the number it ildoesnt exist). In any case the number as a description is not dependent on the subject. It is describing an external part of reality, not giving information about the person who holds the view.

No. Counting external things is describing an external reality. That is using a *mathematical model*, albeit a very simple one. And such a model may or may not be appropriate for any given physical situation. Whether it is or not is a matter of observation and testing.

Please define 'a number as a description' in a way that does not depend on the subject. You make the claim that the number 4 is objective: that it doesn't depend on context or the person using it. I have pointed out a few ways in which it *does* depend on context or the person using it.

Again, you seem to be confusing language with the external reality of things.   If there are 4 trees, then there is four tree's.   Whether you or anyone else knows it, and if you incorrectly count 5 tree's.   Even in your argument here, you appeal to an objective reality outside of the subject.  I would agree, that there is a subjective component to our observations, and our understanding.   But that relates to an external objective reality.   As you keep appealing to yourself.   I don't disagree, that we can be incorrect, or that we may call it different things (due to the conventions of language).  These things do not make something ontologically subjective.