Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by chewybrian »

Terrapin Station wrote: February 13th, 2020, 3:55 pm lol--you don't have a contradiction via two people disagreeing with each other.
Well, I could be arguing in my spare time."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by RJG »

Terrapin Station wrote:This is just gibberish, because it has nothing to do with logic.
Wow, from someone that professes to be an authority on logic, you certainly are ignorant of basic simple logic. -- Do you not understand that ~X=X is a logical impossibility? ...or is this too complex (or too simple?) for you to understand?

No offense TS, but you come across as a "poser".
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Terrapin Station »

RJG wrote: February 13th, 2020, 4:23 pm
Terrapin Station wrote:This is just gibberish, because it has nothing to do with logic.
Wow, from someone that professes to be an authority on logic, you certainly are ignorant of basic simple logic. -- Do you not understand that ~X=X is a logical impossibility? ...or is this too complex (or too simple?) for you to understand?

No offense TS, but you come across as a "poser".
It's a logical impossibility if X is standing for statements.

"No offense TS, but you come across as a 'poser'"--I'd care a lot more about that if you didn't repeatedly make it clear, in post after post, that you really haven't the faintest idea what the F you're talking about, that you have zero ability to reason and learn anything, and that you simply repeat mantras, probably where you're motivated by something like wanting to retain religious beliefs. You'd need to demonstrate that you're qualified to make judgments in order for anyone to care about the judgments you make.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Steve3007 »

RJG wrote:And secondly, wouldn't you further agree that if there WERE something that did logically connect "Nothing to Something", then this something is "Something" (and not-Nothing), which thereby defeats the nothing-hood of "Nothing"! In other words, if there were something (hint hint) that connected Nothing to Something, then this something is certainly not-Nothing! Therefore "Something comes from Nothing" is logically impossible; a self-contradiction; an oxymoron.
Terrapin Station wrote:This is just gibberish, because it has nothing to do with logic.
RJG wrote: Do you not understand that ~X=X is a logical impossibility?
Look at the above exchange. I have to ask at this point RJG, can you read? Why do you keep insisting on these irrelevant straw man questions, thinking that the presence of 'X' and a logical operator or two is enough, in itself? Why do you insist that "talk is cheap" and that people should stick to syllogisms, but when your syllogisms are analyized you ignore the analysis and revert either to word salad, as you've done above, or simply ignoring argument altogether and just re-asserting your beliefs?


(I know I know, straw man is my favourite term. But in this topic it does at least seem fitting in more ways than one.)
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by RJG »

RJG wrote:Do you not understand that ~X=X is a logical impossibility? ...or is this too complex (or too simple?) for you to understand?
Terrapin Station wrote:It's a logical impossibility if X is standing for statements.
Nonsense, it doesn't matter what X stands for (...it is just a variable!).

If you can't answer this SIMPLE logic question - Is ~X=X a logical impossibility? -- then maybe you can understand why I think you are a "poser" (a pretend know-er of logic).


*******
Steve3007 wrote:(I know I know, straw man is my favourite term. But in this topic it does at least seem fitting in more ways than one.)
Steve, do yourself a favor, and re-look up the meaning of a "strawman fallacy". You are, and have been, using it in the wrong manner.

Also if you can't recognize that ~X=X is a logical impossibility, then we probably need to cease our discussions. If you (and TS) can't understand basic logic, then we are wasting our time.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Steve3007 »

RJG wrote:Is ~X=X a logical impossibility?
Endlessly falsely claiming that people are stating that the above is logically possible, so that you can attack them for it, is a straw man fallacy.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Steve3007 »

Also if you can't recognize that ~X=X is a logical impossibility,
And there it is again. Quote somebody making this statement:

"~X=X is logical possible."
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by RJG »

So tell me. Is ~X=X a logical impossibility? ...or am I just going to see more obfuscation? You and TS inability to recognize simple logic is very telling.

If you can't recognize that ~X=X is a logical impossibility, then we probably need to cease our discussions. If you (and TS) can't understand basic logic, then we are wasting our time.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Steve3007 »

Quote somebody making this statement:

"~X=X is logically possible."
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by RJG »

Steve3007 wrote:And there it is again. Quote somebody making this statement:

"~X=X is logical possible."
And there it is again! More obfuscation! More running away from answering this question.

Steve it is a simple question -- Is ~X=X logically impossible or not? -- Don't be afraid. -- A simple YES/NO will do.


...any bets Steve won't answer this simple question? ...and will just give us more lip service and obfuscation? ...any takers out there?
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Steve3007 »

Quote somebody making this statement:

"~X=X is logically possible."
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by RJG »

I win the bet!
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Steve3007 »

Well done RJG. You won the bet. Goodnight.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Terrapin Station »

RJG wrote: February 13th, 2020, 4:49 pm
RJG wrote:Do you not understand that ~X=X is a logical impossibility? ...or is this too complex (or too simple?) for you to understand?
Terrapin Station wrote:It's a logical impossibility if X is standing for statements.
Nonsense, it doesn't matter what X stands for (...it is just a variable!).

If you can't answer this SIMPLE logic question - Is ~X=X a logical impossibility? -- then maybe you can understand why I think you are a "poser" (a pretend know-er of logic).


*******
Steve3007 wrote:(I know I know, straw man is my favourite term. But in this topic it does at least seem fitting in more ways than one.)
Steve, do yourself a favor, and re-look up the meaning of a "strawman fallacy". You are, and have been, using it in the wrong manner.

Also if you can't recognize that ~X=X is a logical impossibility, then we probably need to cease our discussions. If you (and TS) can't understand basic logic, then we are wasting our time.
~X=X is an "I'm not really familiar with logic" way--and something that we often see from Randroids, with Ayn Rand as a good example of someone who wasn't really familiar with logic but who often liked to appeal to logic nevertheless--of stating a contradiction. Most logics do not have an equals sign as an operator/connective. The standard logical way of writing what you're getting at is ~(P&~P), which is the principle of noncontradiction in traditional bivalent logics.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Dorothy's red slippers, and man's ability to understand.

Post by Steve3007 »

errapin Station wrote:The standard logical way of writing what you're getting at is ~(P&~P), which is the principle of noncontradiction in traditional bivalent logics.
Since I write software for a living (in C based languages), if X was a bool, I guess I'd tend to write something like X = !X.
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

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

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021