RE: Dialetheism
November 17, 2016 at 7:14 pm
(This post was last modified: November 17, 2016 at 7:17 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
Yes I'm not I'm talking about how the logical absolutes =/= the conceptualization of them. That's why they're absolute.
Whatever is, is (A=A).
That's true regardless of how we do or don't conceptualize something or nothing or anything. I don't have to know it, it just is. But that's why I know it. It's the one thing everyone knows because, again, "I think therefore I am" presupposes "I am what I am" and "I think what I think" or IOW A=A.
You're acting like I'm arrogant for claiming absolute knowledge regarding the one truth that is absolutely absolute lol. I'd be deluded to deny A=A that would be saying "reality is not reality", I'd be denying reality. Again, reality first, then knowledge. I must exist to know that I exist, that's kind of the point. Anyone who says A can = anything other than A is confused. A thing kind of has to be a thing.
Whatever is, is (A=A).
That's true regardless of how we do or don't conceptualize something or nothing or anything. I don't have to know it, it just is. But that's why I know it. It's the one thing everyone knows because, again, "I think therefore I am" presupposes "I am what I am" and "I think what I think" or IOW A=A.
You're acting like I'm arrogant for claiming absolute knowledge regarding the one truth that is absolutely absolute lol. I'd be deluded to deny A=A that would be saying "reality is not reality", I'd be denying reality. Again, reality first, then knowledge. I must exist to know that I exist, that's kind of the point. Anyone who says A can = anything other than A is confused. A thing kind of has to be a thing.
