Comments

  • I just noticed that it's all about money, the new standard of the universe
    No. However this doesn't satisfy anyone, people like to view goods as status and or a sign of progression.RobertMetz

    Do you think that's healthy? I don't have anything against rich people but it's the way the system works that even the havenots share the belief that anything can be bought. This induces moral corruption and I'm not saying I'm not guilty of being bought, sold, or bribed. However, it would be easier for us if money wasn't the metric of value.

    Anyway now that I realize it no alternative would work because anything that measures value would be susceptible to corruption. Thanks.
  • I just noticed that it's all about money, the new standard of the universe
    I'm concerned about the consequences. If value is measured in terms of money then everything is on sale. All you need to do is agree on a price. If I'm not mistaken even God is on sale now.
  • I don't think there's free will
    Hello, fellow robot. We're free of fame and blame and shame. That there are so many differing kinds of robots out there obscures the fact that the will is fixed to what it must do in the instant of its use. At least there is consistency. If I were the opposite, as an arbitrary air-head, I'd be long dead now.PoeticUniverse

    Why do you think the alternative to robot is air-head? Self-awareness draws the line between man and machine but it's not necessary that self-awareness comes with free will. We can be non-robots and still reason well.
  • I don't think there's free will
    A person is coerced by others into doing something or is coerced by circumstances to ‘choose’. We call the latter “free will”. So I agree that there is no such thing as a “free” will.Noah Te Stroete

    I don't want to expand the scope of coercion here. According to what I see there are two types of forces that affect our decisions. One is internal and usually unseen until the off chance that we feel a need to resist it and the other is external which is what I think you mean by "coercion".

    What is important is both types of forces are beyond our control. Don't you think?
  • The power of Negation (or not)
    This OP is not not simplistic in its treatment of language.Noah Te Stroete

    Well, you can only get so far with a MadFool. Anyway if one considers logic we usually don't invent new names for a negation of a statement. To negate A we say ~A and don't use another name like B or C.
  • Absolute rest is impossible - All is motion
    I’ll be honest, I just thought that the Diogenes story was funny. Regardless, I think that as usual his crude way of doing things reveals some truth, this time being that actions speak louder and sometimes truer than words.TogetherTurtle

    :up:
  • The power of Negation (or not)
    In English, and all other languages I assume, there are always at least several different ways to say something. Actually, maybe not exactly the same thing. Antonyms rarely have exactly the same meaning. Even if their definitions are the same, there are nuances, implications, moods that differ. That gives language a lot of subtle power.T Clark

    I agree because the negation of x is simply what is not x. But not x consists of not one but many alternatives (nuances) and so must be named. For instance let's say we want to talk about what isn't hate. We could say not-hate but this category has within it sensual love, parental love, friendship love, etc. each requiring a name.
  • The power of Negation (or not)
    :up: thanks for the info.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Praying is only good for meditating on self-improvement. It is worthless in influencing others.Noah Te Stroete

    I know but *shrug*
  • Absolute rest is impossible - All is motion
    None of the above.noAxioms

    Can you describe this in words?

    I can take a triangle and twirl it about and yes, there is motion but that doesn't imply that the length AB is changing.noAxioms

    I was thinking about. Motion doesn't mean simply a change in distance rather a change in position too qualifies as motion. When you twirl the triangle the distance stays the same, yes, but there is a change in position no? Is that not motion?
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Pray, pray and pray and pray even more.
  • Absolute rest is impossible - All is motion
    Very kind of you to bring Zeno into the discussion. I didn't expect that but I think Zeno is ignored by science. Whether that's right/wrong is another issue but take my post in a scientific context which accepts that motion is possible.
  • Is god a coward? Why does god fear to show himself?
    As our friend just posted.

    Only a Fool would blame His own creations
    For the taint therein—of His poor craftsmanship.
    — PoeticUniverse
    Gnostic Christian Bishop

    I meant to say that, hidden in our psyche, there's a part of us that wants God to exist. The times when we're distracted by the many pleasures of worldly life we don't get to see that part of us but it does surface when we're in mortal danger.

    This of course is not proof that God exists but it does go to show that we're willing to forgive his faults, meaning us, our vices and the world, its unforgiving nature.
  • A white butterfly and the human condition
    Have you not previously noticed those small winged white things flying around at night? Moths?Bitter Crank

    Yes I'm aware of moths. As I said my entomological knowledge isn't at expert level but I was once told that butterflies fold their wings vertically while moths keep them horizontal. The winged critter on my hand had its wings folded vertically. So...
  • Absolute rest is impossible - All is motion
    That's a good point but are your hands moving relative to your keyboard when you type something. I think we can begin there too.
  • The power of Negation (or not)
    Yes you're right but think about it. Consider language to be a circle One semi-circle consists of all "positive" words (lacking the vocabulary here so bear with me). All words that are antonyms are, quite appropriately, diametrically opposite - the other half of the circle - and can be referenced simply by negating, using "not".

    I'm not advocating anything. I just want views.
  • Is god a coward? Why does god fear to show himself?
    Isn't it strange that fear makes us pray? Kinda makes you think about who's at fault here?
  • The power of Negation (or not)
    I'm someone with graduate degrees in two very different fields.Terrapin Station

    :cheer: :clap: Wow!!
  • The power of Negation (or not)
    That seems like you're taking a brain/computer analogy too literally.

    Who has a problem with "memory space" that's taken up by vocabulary?
    Terrapin Station

    You may be right. Our memory could be different from a hard drive.

    Do you have any idea on how different the two are?

    Ever notice that no person can be an expert on more than a couple of fields? I've heard of polymaths but they were all during a time when knowledge was at its infancy - less to remember. Where are the polymaths of now?
  • What does psychosis tell us about the nature of reality?
    I guess one could make a distinction, that between true reality and normal reality. The former is inaccessible as some posters have mentioned but the latter is what most people perceive and have a consensus on. What if psychotics are those who can, at certain times, perceive true reality? The rest of us would find that "abnormal" and put all sorts of labels on it.
  • What is the difference between God and the Theory of Everything?
    A probability of 0.000000000000000000001% is still greater than 0%.Possibility



    :rofl: :rofl:
  • Handedness and evil
    I did not know this. Honestly. Sorry. I live in a world where left-handedness is a matter of fact, like red-headedness or having buck teeth or a lisp. Nobody discriminates negatively in the circles I move in against leftiesgod must be atheist

    No apology necessary. Any arguments against lefties?
  • What is a scientific attitude?
    If rationality, which is hopefully everyone's goal, is a picture of a group of models, science is basically the most beautiful one among them.

    Why?

    There's a harmony in her form.
  • What is laziness?
    Very interesting question.

    We all work, some work harder than others but the bottomline is we work which here is contrary to laziness. However, why do we work? To earn the means to food, shelter and clothing. These are basic needs I've described but after these are satisfied what do we do with our time? Nap, watch TV, surf the web, read a book, chat with your friends, etc. which are all what we see lazy people doing.

    So lazy people are doing exactly what people who aren't lazy want to do after they work. I'm beginning to think laziness is everyone's objective. Stolen moments from paradise.
  • ''Not giving a fuck'' as an alternative to morality as we know it
    I think you need to work on your argument because not to give a fuck "comes" off as too strong an assertion. To not give a fuck about anything, if movies and novels are accurate, is a sign of mental derangement and in such cases most of those who don't give a fuck will unleash their base instincts and that's not going to turn out well right?

    One could argue that if EVERYONE didn't give a fuck then the situation may be quite different. Of course it all depends on the possibility of such a thing. Can we really not give a fuck about suffering. Suffering has a way of grabbing your attention especially if experienced in the first person. Could you really not give a fuck about someone beating you with a baseball bat? I don't know. I've heard of mad saints who would fall into that category but notice I said "mad". To not give a fuck about anything is insane.

    Perhaps we can reposition ourselves on the not-give-a-fuck-couch by separating things we do give a fuck about from those we don't give a fuck about. I have a feeling, almost a foreboding, that if you really think about it nothing really matters which is basically what you're trying to say here - don't give a fuck about anything.

    HOWEVER, not everyone is on the same page and we need to accommodate those who do care, give a fuck in your parlance, about whathaveyou. That's very important or else <insert undesirable consequences>.
  • Handedness and evil
    And so we are forced to look for real principles to support your dubious conclusion which appeals to our intuition, co-operation (might) in the service of evil, is actually the opposite of "right".Metaphysician Undercover

    You've just proven my point by saying "...is actually the opposite of "right"". My entire OP has been about this prejudice against lefties.
  • Handedness and evil
    ancient word in an ancient and defunct language, with its ancient-time meaning (left-handed) and juxtaposing that meaning with the same string of phonemes and letters and equating therefore the old meaning of sinister to the new meaning of sinister.god must be atheist

    The bias is still prevalent so no, not "ancient" but very much alive and kicking two-thirds of the world still hates lefties dated 2013
  • Zeno and Immortality


    I guess an explanation for Zeno's paradox would apply here. A convergent infinite series.
  • Zeno and Immortality
    No. The union of all the points in that interval still lasts 43 yearsfdrake

    If we take time to be on a number line how many points of time are there between 1976 and 2019? Infinite, unless you want to invoke Planck time?
  • The Principle Of Sufficient Reason
    Leibniz says only contingent things need a reason, God is necessary, so he does not need a reason. This is somewhat lame - saying something is necessary does not in itself explain why it is necessary.Devans99

    I wonder what Leibniz meant.

    I read the wikipedia article on the PSR and Leibniz claims that necessary truths are those whose denial leads to a contradiction.

    1. PSR is true
    2. No contingent reason is sufficient
    Therefore
    3. There is a necessary reason = God

    If you reject 3 then there is a contradiction viz. the PSR is false and true because any contingent reason would be sufficient. That's how far I got. Any comments?
  • Handedness and evil


    I don't know if you are joking or not.god must be atheist

    Sorry if my OP is poorly constructed. I posted it in The Lounge for a reason.

    The entire concept you present sounds like a humourless joke to me. I could see the point in your post if it were funnygod must be atheist

    It wasn't meant as a joke and I did a little bit of research. Here's a link that claims what I said in my OP.

    Try to work on it some more. This is a good concept to work on. Just don't leave it in its present formgod must be atheist

    Thanks. I read about how left-handedness is associated with evil and one good example for that is the word "sinister" which means both evil and left. This bias towards left-handedness seems to be cross-cultural. Of course it could be true that left-handed people are inclined to evil but this doesn't match the facts. Just as an example the holocaust required a high level of co-operation among the Nazis in terms of unified ideology and implementing of extermination plans against hapless Jews and other minorities. In fact I would say that had there been competition (left-handed folks) - opposing viewpoints - the Nazis may have not committed such atrocities.

    As you can see, if you agree with the above, associating lefties with evil is not just a bias by the majority. It's in fact a falsehood and the reverse, right-handedness and its associated higher co-operativity has a greater connection to evil, is true.

    That said, we all know one man can't do shit. If there's a good idea e.g. environmental awareness, helping the poor, etc., we need co-operation more than competition. So, it's not that right-handedness and co-operation are downright evil/bad.

    However, evil, if not just benign, even childish, as one man cursing another, but at a level to unsettle even the toughest people and qualify as a true and undeniable atrocity (genocide, mass murder) required co-operation. As you are fully aware of in such cases only a handful of protests will be there and although they may not be left-handed they function in the spirit of competition which is left-handed.
  • Zeno and Immortality
    Probably there isn't an infinite amount of points to crossTerrapin Station

    That could be it. How do you then account for the following:

    Mr x (1976 to 2019). x has to first reach 1997 and before that he has to reach 1986 and before that 1981and before that 1971 each time interval can halved indefinitely. The math says so. Is the problem with math or a subset of math infinity?
  • Zeno and Immortality
    Strangely "cousin" is a relational termTerrapin Station

    You should be happy your "relative" wins the race and puts the Greeks to shame. :smile:

    Anyway do you have any idea where I f***ed up in my reasoning?

    I'm not sure but I'm beginning to doubt the whole notion of infinity.
  • Zeno and Immortality
    Why is that strange?Terrapin Station

    I was talking about the tortoise and Achilles paradox and a cousin responded. Coincidence! Strange.
  • Zeno and Immortality
    When you get to a point such as that in your reasoning, it's a cue to say, "Oops! I must have f-ed up somewhere, at least in some assumption I made.Terrapin Station

    Strangely Terrapin is a type of turtle.
  • Zeno and Immortality
    Not weird, but in the sense that it is. The weirdness is a product of insufficient knowledge wielding inadequate imagination in attempting to understand the ineffable.tim wood

    Ok. That's really weird. Anyway what is ineffable in my post?
  • The eternity Problem
    The very definition of infinite is arbitrary because there are infinities bigger than others and now the eternity becomes as small as a moment.Filipe

    You're right unless time as we experience it is simply a subset of something even bigger.
  • Context principle (Frege) and Language game (Wittgenstein)
    Thanks a lot. I ask because in the wikipedia article on the philosophical investigations they say that Wittgenstein was inspired by Piero Saffra. However the content seems to reflect Frege's line of thinking viz. the CP. Can I download the Philosophical Investigations for free? :smile:
  • Context principle (Frege) and Language game (Wittgenstein)


    Wittgenstein’s assent to the Context Principle continued long after the Tractatus. He remained committed to it while developing his mature conception of ‘meaning as use’ in the Philosophical Investigations, where he again quotes the Context Principle verbatim (§49). In the Tractatus, as we have seen, the Context Principle is essentially used in a structural way. However, it already contains in embryonic form the idea of the Philosophical Investigations that there is a ‘philosophical grammar’ to our claims about the world that is embodied in our practice of using language meaningfully. At the time he was writing the Tractatus, Wittgenstein could only understand this notion of ‘background’ – what was later to become ‘grammar’ – in terms of an abstract structure underlying our language-use but independent of it. It was only when the lessons of his mature conception of linguistic use had been absorbed that the full concept of ‘grammar’ emerged, and Wittgenstein saw that our most fundamental practical commitments as human language-users are an intimate part of what it means to characterise reality in language. So in the Investigations, although the Context Principle continues to be affirmed, the context shifts from propositions to include the entire language game and ourselves as competent language-users in the various forms of life we pursue. Yet to the extent that Frege recognised that the linguistic characterisation of reality is always contextual, and the Wittgenstein of the Tractatus endorsed Frege’s insight, it is possible to represent the origins of Wittgenstein’s mature conception of language in the Investigations and beyond as already there in the Context Principle as it emerges in the Tractatus, and in the work of Wittgenstein’s illustrious forebear, Gottlob Frege.

    © Rev. Dr Susan J. Lucas 2015
    — philosophynow.org