RE: Nothingness
May 19, 2013 at 12:40 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2013 at 1:12 pm by Violet.)
Learn... to... quote...
Everything with a [ quote ] must be followed by an [ /quote ]
With that said, I will fix your worthless post. Then I shall tell you why it is worthless
It was hard to decipher, because I couldn't see your post at the time, you twit. And no, being a physicist doesn't have any impact upon any argument you might make.
As for the post content itself, it was piss poor. If you wish to remake any of the points you made in it: restate them... with proper formatting this time, if you don't mind.
There you have it: faith. Problem?
Whether accepting logic be foolish or not... it is possible to not accept it. If you do not accept one law of logic, the others all fall apart.
Oddly, various things being an apply is consistent with the observation that any particular matter/energy is defined differently according to what observes it.
DO I, now? If you were to tell me that, I might stab you. Not because of logic, but because if you're the kind of person to tell a lie or to retract a statement in the first place: my desire to stab you increases by about 50 points.
No... the third law is 'there is ONLY A or ≠A'. There are no other options. At least... according to the belief.
Alan Turning never lived, because the universe came into being yesterday, and any logic that has succeeded since has been an utter fluke.
Oh whatever, I'll handle this rabble too.
The point was that there is no causation where there are no laws, and the point stands. Instability would only illustrate that.
Nothing is destroyed by annihilation, there is only change. The force transfers into new particles, which then reform into other particles.
Nothing and anti-nothing?
That's your glorious point? Oh please. Nothingness is the void of *any* particles, *any* matter, *any* energy... there is only one nothing, and she plays for neither team.
Nope, I don't have enough faith in logic. 'Chaos' to you is heaven to me.
Societies would adapt if logic completely stopped functioning at all levels, people might believe anything they're told if they're stupid, and there are already no conclusions to anything.
Logic is often part of our belief system, but that doesn't stop it from itself being a belief.
Logic and reason are not one and the same. Simply: you cannot reason logically with a person who rejects logic
Or you can, but you should expect nothing.
Someone's willingness to openly say <anything> is illustrative of something other than their willingness to openly say <anything>?
Doesn't follow.
The points he makes are weak, regardless of whether they be valid points at all. I should expect better of someone named gnosis, but... well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Vyj1C8ogtE
Do you have problems with different types of thinkers? Sounds like you might be a thinkist. Are all thoughts not created equal?
Oh of course... the only reason one might not believe something is a lack of understanding about that something There is no system that gives you an "ability to articulate a non-contradictory reason why", this is innate to you, should you consider to use it.
Contradictory reasons are also available, of course... but that's nothing new.
Why yes, logic is a vicious circle. I feel badly for believers in logic... just as I feel badly for believers of all stripes. It's one thing to understand a process, another to use that process for argument's sake, and yet another to believe in it.
I'm against the 'believing-in' of things
I shouldn't think that you would understand anything I say, I mean: the concepts are clearly too advanced for such believers. I'll just have to hope that my observations hit nonbelievers, and that they do something for them. Or not.
I'll bet you're such an egoist that you trust your senses
Two jellybeans, thank you... because there are coconut fish in my lake
He's so violent... I'll leave you all to your pathetic logic and other faiths. I'm not about to murder someone over believing something I don't
But I will kill ANYONE who harbors bananas in their household
Everything with a [ quote ] must be followed by an [ /quote ]
With that said, I will fix your worthless post. Then I shall tell you why it is worthless
(May 17, 2013 at 8:51 pm)Gnosis Wrote: If it was easy to decipher we would have the answers to everything. unfortunately I'm not a physicist so i cant. But I get the feeling if I was one you wouldn't listen to me anyway.
It was hard to decipher, because I couldn't see your post at the time, you twit. And no, being a physicist doesn't have any impact upon any argument you might make.
As for the post content itself, it was piss poor. If you wish to remake any of the points you made in it: restate them... with proper formatting this time, if you don't mind.
Quote:But yes, logic is only supported by logic. If you do not simply accept its three laws... you cannot believe in logic. Logically.
There you have it: faith. Problem?
Quote:logic is logic... theres no way of looking at it differently, Some people just choose to ignore levels of it. Logic is preinstalled in the brain. Not accepting it is foolish. your referring to the aristotle three laws ? right so you don't accept them ?
So if i was to say that apple is an apple ? first law ... its not because you don't accept that logic .. ? there something in between .. an orange is an apple !
Whether accepting logic be foolish or not... it is possible to not accept it. If you do not accept one law of logic, the others all fall apart.
Oddly, various things being an apply is consistent with the observation that any particular matter/energy is defined differently according to what observes it.
Quote:you obviously believe in contradiction (not surprising) .. second law.
if i was to tell you, Today i went to the store and then i was to say to you today i did not go to the store... ill-logical ? doesn't matter you don't accept the three laws so thats totally possible.
DO I, now? If you were to tell me that, I might stab you. Not because of logic, but because if you're the kind of person to tell a lie or to retract a statement in the first place: my desire to stab you increases by about 50 points.
Quote:third law, true or false. pretty simple. Our good friend Alan Turning used this to design the logic engine. Which is the reason why we can debate on this wonderful forum right now...
Its looking pretty good for aristotle
No... the third law is 'there is ONLY A or ≠A'. There are no other options. At least... according to the belief.
Alan Turning never lived, because the universe came into being yesterday, and any logic that has succeeded since has been an utter fluke.
Oh whatever, I'll handle this rabble too.
(May 17, 2013 at 12:06 pm)Gnosis Wrote:(May 16, 2013 at 1:44 am)Violet Lilly Blossom Wrote: Why would causation occur where there are no laws by which it is to occur? Most people are just crazy.
Because empty space is unstable.
The point was that there is no causation where there are no laws, and the point stands. Instability would only illustrate that.
Quote:Em well everything! you bring the two together and they destroy each other into nothing the theory is the process can reverse itself.
Nothing is destroyed by annihilation, there is only change. The force transfers into new particles, which then reform into other particles.
Nothing and anti-nothing?
That's your glorious point? Oh please. Nothingness is the void of *any* particles, *any* matter, *any* energy... there is only one nothing, and she plays for neither team.Quote:Not enough faith in logic ? And yet without it the world would fall into chaos,
Society's would cease to exits. People would believe anything they where told. There would be no conclusions to anything. The flying spaghetti monster would have a chance. Do you believe in the flying spaghetti monster ? Not many people do... Why ? because its ill-logical.
Nope, I don't have enough faith in logic. 'Chaos' to you is heaven to me.
Societies would adapt if logic completely stopped functioning at all levels, people might believe anything they're told if they're stupid, and there are already no conclusions to anything.
Logic is often part of our belief system, but that doesn't stop it from itself being a belief.
(May 17, 2013 at 10:08 pm)Texas Sailor Wrote: You can't reason with somebody that openly rejects reason.
Logic and reason are not one and the same. Simply: you cannot reason logically with a person who rejects logic
Or you can, but you should expect nothing.Quote:Somebody willing to openly say they reject logic could not put it any plainly to you that they are irrational.
Someone's willingness to openly say <anything> is illustrative of something other than their willingness to openly say <anything>?
Doesn't follow.
Quote:The points you make are valid, but not to these types of thinkers.
The points he makes are weak, regardless of whether they be valid points at all. I should expect better of someone named gnosis, but... well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Vyj1C8ogtE
Do you have problems with different types of thinkers? Sounds like you might be a thinkist. Are all thoughts not created equal?
Quote:There are things they don't believe, they just don't understand the system that gives them the ability to articulate a non-contradictory reason why.
Oh of course... the only reason one might not believe something is a lack of understanding about that something
There is no system that gives you an "ability to articulate a non-contradictory reason why", this is innate to you, should you consider to use it.Contradictory reasons are also available, of course... but that's nothing new.
Quote:Anything they do believe in, falls short of intelligible thought due to the same cause, its a vicious circle.
Why yes, logic is a vicious circle. I feel badly for believers in logic... just as I feel badly for believers of all stripes. It's one thing to understand a process, another to use that process for argument's sake, and yet another to believe in it.
I'm against the 'believing-in' of things
Quote:It's funny, but don't get your hopes up that they will actually understand a single thing you say.
I shouldn't think that you would understand anything I say, I mean: the concepts are clearly too advanced for such believers. I'll just have to hope that my observations hit nonbelievers, and that they do something for them. Or not.
I'll bet you're such an egoist that you trust your senses
Quote:Just see if you can give them some jelly beans or something, pat them on the head, and be on your way ( e.g. Waldorf).
Two jellybeans, thank you... because there are coconut fish in my lake
(May 17, 2013 at 10:34 pm)Ryantology Wrote: Martin Luther understood that faith and reason are incompatible and admitted it proudly:
"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God."
Modern Christians, agreeing in principle with Luther but lacking the honesty to admit it, are constantly guilty of misconstruing faith as reason and delusion as knowledge.
He's so violent... I'll leave you all to your pathetic logic and other faiths. I'm not about to murder someone over believing something I don't
But I will kill ANYONE who harbors bananas in their household
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
