RE: On Logic and Alternate Universes
November 6, 2016 at 9:18 pm
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2016 at 9:23 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
(November 6, 2016 at 9:04 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I've accepted your hypothetical. 2+2=5 in some alternative universe, somehow.
See. You're at least saying that much of what the OP is saying and we certainly do not agree there. I've only ever been disagreeing about this, so telling I'm agreeing with you when I've been talking about this disagreement the whole time is a strawman. You can't say I'm not addressing the OP's question when the question is based on a hypothetical that I don't even agree exists, all that exists is the words not the meaning the words are supposed to represent. So saying "it's right here in this thread" is a use/mention error. The words that the OP is trying to make into a hypothetical is here, but the hypothetical itself is not, because such a thing the OP is trying to get us to imagine cannot actually be imagined, because he's talking the mathematical equivalent of square circles, because we're already talking base 10, because we're not talking alternative mathematical languages, because we're talking about logical and mathematical absolutes not their concepts or languages.
This whole thing has been a bunch of your repeatedly equivocating. I can always spot equivocation. It's my speciality.
No, it's wrong to accept such a hypothetical. You can accept the mentioning and the existence of the words here on AF "If there is a universe where 2+2=5 then 2+2=5" but such a thing has failed to actually be imagined or hypothesized. You can't have two things and two things that equates to one thing more than itself. Just like you can't have A that = not A or a bachelor that is married or a square circle. What universe it is or whether it's hypothetical or not is irrelevant, and you need to stop making use/mention errors when you say the hypothetical is right here. The words are right here, but the meaning is not. The meaning of "2+2=5" is meaningless, it can't be hypothesized, it can't be imagined, it can merely be mentioned and written. You can't have the tautology "if 2+2=5 then 2+2=5" because that violates the law of identity when it's a tautology that presupposes the law of identity.
