Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
- The Beast
- Posts: 1403
- Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: February 3rd, 2015, 11:25 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
I whole-heartedly agree. I label things differently. God=essence.
- The Beast
- Posts: 1403
- Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
-
- Posts: 1532
- Joined: May 6th, 2013, 4:03 pm
- Location: Yorkshire
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
Is this a sort of puzzle where we have to put the words in the right order ourselves?The Beast wrote: This of what is thought make us one or two.
-- Updated June 5th, 2015, 9:28 pm to add the following --
Does it come in a little bottle, like vanilla?Conway wrote:Beast
God=essence.
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: February 3rd, 2015, 11:25 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
There is more than one way to define essence. It may be the fragrance of vanilla perfume. Thus the essence of the perfume is vanilla. But I am sure you know that this is not the essence we were talking about. To be more specific, the essence we were referring to is that which is a apriori. Or if you would rather, I would suggest, with no proof. Essence = God = Unified Field = "the wave function". This is getting off topic and I apologize.
-
- Posts: 1532
- Joined: May 6th, 2013, 4:03 pm
- Location: Yorkshire
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
God is something I have no experience of so I have no idea what God's essence is supposed to be. Vanilla, on the other hand, is something I do have experience of so if you talk about vanilla essence I do know what you mean, although it was it's flavour rather than it's odour that I was thinking of.Conway wrote: Or if you would rather, I would suggest, with no proof. Essence = God = Unified Field = "the wave function". This is getting off topic and I apologize.
-- Updated June 6th, 2015, 12:14 am to add the following --
Just to clarify: There is nothing a priori about vanilla, you have to taste it to know what it's like.Harbal wrote:God is something I have no experience of so I have no idea what God's essence is supposed to be. Vanilla, on the other hand, is something I do have experience of so if you talk about vanilla essence I do know what you mean, although it was it's flavour rather than it's odour that I was thinking of.Conway wrote: Or if you would rather, I would suggest, with no proof. Essence = God = Unified Field = "the wave function". This is getting off topic and I apologize.
-
- Posts: 27
- Joined: February 3rd, 2015, 11:25 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
"God is something I have no experience of "-How do you really know you have experience's at all?
what is it you taste when you taste vanilla? how do you know that is what you taste? how do you know it's what others taste? What's to say your taste of it, isn't altered in some form unknown to us. Such as a little less salt in the earth at it's birth, might change it's taste all together. All things derive from the a priori. It is only a collective subjective objective beliefs that we as "humans" know anything at all.
-- Updated June 5th, 2015, 7:37 pm to add the following --
o yeah 1 + 1 = 2, is refutable from my perspective.
-
- Posts: 1532
- Joined: May 6th, 2013, 4:03 pm
- Location: Yorkshire
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
Unlike you and Beast, you mean? Well, I can certainly live with that.Conway wrote:Lol I should think there is no philosopher in you sir.
- The Beast
- Posts: 1403
- Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
-
- Posts: 1532
- Joined: May 6th, 2013, 4:03 pm
- Location: Yorkshire
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
I suppose it's English, Jim, but not as we know it.The Beast wrote:How so English Middle Age to write about a Beast and a maze. Perhaps we should say Harbal Merlin or Merlin Harbal missing flavors in some cauldron. Favor? … No favor here said Mr. Poe spitting the flavor. It is you Mr. Harbal flavoring your own tale. Where is your tale?
- The Beast
- Posts: 1403
- Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
- Spiral Out
- Posts: 5014
- Joined: June 26th, 2012, 10:22 am
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
- Jestr
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 5
- Joined: June 20th, 2015, 8:14 pm
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
Boolean algebra is different than binary algebra, and the latter would correspond to octal or hex systems. In binary, 1 + 1 = 10. Boolean algebra doesn't really involve addition.Jestr wrote:In Boolean Algebra, or binary language, 1+1=1, as there can be only a 0 or 1 as sum or product. Works quite well in computing, just not well understood by most familiar with a base 10 system only. Octal and Hex can blow your mind even further...
Boolean algebra works with truth values not numbers. Thus, it's more accurate to write "true + true = true" in Boolean algebra. Computer programmers or those doing Boolean algebra for some reason may just choose to use one and zeros to represent it, which is convenient because in any computer language I know any integer besides 0 will convert to true during a type conversion. However, even in computer language, when you add the two together you end up with a integer of 2 (which is the same number whether represented as 2 or in binary as 10), which then has to be re-converted back to Boolean to give the desired result of true. A better way in fact to represent it for the layman would not be addition but multiplication (even though Boolean algebra uses neither addition nor multiplication as main operators):
1 * 1 * 1 = 1
1 * 0 * 1 = 0
It's an absurdly complicated way of explaining and representing something that is actual simple and that is widely and easily understood. To illustrate, the sentence, "I am a man and have a unicorn," is false, but only because any one of the elements is false. (I am a man but I don't have a unicorn.) If the statement was true, all its elements and sub-statements would have to be true. The important part is that all of this has nothing to do with the original question in which clearly the context had nothing to do with Boolean truth values. This entire exercise is indicative of a fallacy of equivocation.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
- Ambauer
- Posts: 65
- Joined: October 6th, 2015, 9:59 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Cosmo the Hedonist
Re: Is there a way to refute '1+1 = 2'?
One lump of clay plus one lump of clay equals twice the amount of clay... 1+1=2Philosophy Explorer wrote:Try this. One lump of clay combined with one lump of clay is just one lump of clay.
PhilX
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023