@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz It's dumb but it's not really nihilistic. It's making the mistake all these sophisticated premodern inductive philosophies do where it mistakes language for the referent the language points too.
You can't describe any one thing without making references to other things, so that thing isn't really the thing in itself, therefore there is no thing. There's an intuitive logic but it's obviously wrong.
But like, it's no more wrong than the opposite view, literalist Platonism, where things literally have forms located somewhere that gives every chair continuity with other chairs.
God forbid we just allow linquistic conventions to be linquistic conventions.