User Tag List

First 414950515253 Last

Results 501 to 510 of 581

  1. #501
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536
    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Do we know this? How do you define consciousness? Most people's definitions will be a little bit different.
    There are many signs of consciousness but those without a prefrontal cortex show none of these signs.

    The fact is you want to imagine a tree is conscious. Well, that's fine.

  2. #502
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    Do you believe in gray areas? Binary logic doesn't do them. Something is either entirely true as defined by the premises, or entirely false as defined by the premises.

    Can you always express a given truth in a binary fashion given sufficient complexity? I don't even know, but if you cant, binary logic simply would not allow things which exceed this to exist.

    Consider the continuum fallacy. Or the Sorites paradox. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox

    How are these things addressed? By MVL, and Hysteresis among other things. Yes, many of these problems can somehow be handled in binary logic, but complexity increases dramatically for anything non-trivial. There is no 'kinda true' there - all bits in a given problem are either completely true or completely false, without even an 'unknown' anywhere.

    I believe in gray areas in regards to our knowledge of reality but not in reality itself.

    I think you could with sufficient complexity describe all things as either true or untrue. I'm not arguing that the truth of anything is simple or even knowable by us. What I'm arguing is that there is an objective reality which exists and that the "truth" of the world is this reality rather than any of our subjective perceptions of reality.

    So in regards to the Sorites paradox I would argue that the absolute truth of a "heap" is that it is a vague term that does not signify a defined quantity but a subjective evaluation of a quantity in relation to other quantities. I think that is true in regards to how the word "heap" is used.

  3. #503
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    What about things which are true some of the time and not others?

    Like, if I was observing the behavior of subatomic particles, and I declared "This electron exists in this location," and then as soon as I said it it changed location. Or in the process of me saying it it changed location. What I said was true at the time that I said it, but if I were to make the statement a few seconds later it would not be true. Of course you could talk about creating equations describing their paths as a function of time, and using them to make predictions. Or what about something entirely subjective like love: Love is both pleasant and unpleasant. Being in love is easy some of the time and hard other times. So are the statements "love is easy" and "love is difficult" contradictory?

    I know, I'm not using hard logic here. Just throwing things out. I'm really just asking questions, not pretending I have answers.
    We already addressed this before. With the women and the apples. The statements "women love apples" and "women hate apples" cannot both be true, but the statement "women have differing feelings on apples" can be true.

    The absolute truth in that case is that electrons are not fixed in space. The statement of an electrons location at a certain time is still true even if it occupies a different location at a different time. Even if it occupied two different locations at the same time there would still be the objective truth that "electrons can exist in multiple locations at a time".

    The truth of love would be that it can be both pleasant and unpleasant depending on the circumstances of ones love.

  4. #504
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    All of those behaviors are still objectively true.

    I think I haven't made myself clear to you guys.

    I'm not saying that something can't be two things at once. That is possible. What I'm saying is that there are not multiple truths.

    It is true that all of the above mentioned phenomena occur. it is not true that they don't occur.

  5. #505
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Can you translate anything spiritual into thinking and logical terms? This thread is about philosophy and spirituality. Logic is not the point of the thread. Of course it looks NF. It's a feeling subject.

    How does spirituality escape the scope of logic? I don't see spirituality as the realm where things no longer have to make sense. If you assume there are supernatural/metaphysical forces those forces will have a nature and a way of functioning. There will have there own inherent logic based on their way of functioning.

  6. #506
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    I thought I was pretty good at it, but I guess not. I'm only good at applying logic to mystical symbolic terms which people dismiss because they are vague and mystical.


    People aren't dismissing it because it's mystical.

  7. #507
    ✿ڿڰۣஇღ♥ wut ♥ღஇڿڰۣ✿ digesthisickness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pseudo View Post
    People aren't dismissing it because it's mystical.
    Honestly, I dismissed it because it's just one more overly simplistic meme that can't begin to encompass the complexities of human relationships, but acts like it's solved the 'big riddle'.

    Also, so many of these things purport to be attributed to some older culture as if it gives it more credence when no proof that it was ever seen that way by them at all is ever given.
    ✻ღϠ₡ღ✻
    (¯`✻´¯)
    `*.¸.*'ღϠ₡ღஇڿڰۣ
    •.¸¸. Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒჱܓ. இڿڰۣ.¸¸.இڿڰۣ´¯`·.─♥


    Cerebral Artery
    http://www.facebook.com/CerebralArtery

  8. #508
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pseudo View Post
    I believe in gray areas in regards to our knowledge of reality but not in reality itself.

    I think you could with sufficient complexity describe all things as either true or untrue. I'm not arguing that the truth of anything is simple or even knowable by us. What I'm arguing is that there is an objective reality which exists and that the "truth" of the world is this reality rather than any of our subjective perceptions of reality.

    So in regards to the Sorites paradox I would argue that the absolute truth of a "heap" is that it is a vague term that does not signify a defined quantity but a subjective evaluation of a quantity in relation to other quantities. I think that is true in regards to how the word "heap" is used.
    Yeah that falls under epistemology.

    I accept that there's one reality pretty much, and that we can reason things out through various methods, which is why I'm willing to use logic when appropriate, and also go outside its boundaries when appropriate.

    In regards to the heap, in a bivalent system it is either exactly a heap, or it isn't. Calling it a vague term is something else than that, which is why this paradox came about to begin with. It's a problem when the principle of bivalence is strictly maintained and is more a shortcoming of rigid syntax than a problem with being vague.

    So yes it is a vague term. A vague term which is meaningful in natural language yet paradoxically breaks all sense and reason when applied to logical rules. So we end up with philosophical disputes on when logic should be applied rigorously and when some form of outside reason should be considered, because if we were purely in the realm of logic and couldn't operate by any other rules, we'd be forced to say that heaps don't exist. Not that they are subjective or vague since such things aren't allowed. Either heap or not heap.

  9. #509
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    Yeah that falls under epistemology.

    I accept that there's one reality pretty much, and that we can reason things out through various methods, which is why I'm willing to use logic when appropriate, and also go outside its boundaries when appropriate.

    In regards to the heap, in a bivalent system it is either exactly a heap, or it isn't. Calling it a vague term is something else than that, which is why this paradox came about to begin with. It's a problem when the principle of bivalence is strictly maintained and is more a shortcoming of rigid syntax than a problem with being vague.

    So yes it is a vague term. A vague term which is meaningful in natural language yet paradoxically breaks all sense and reason when applied to logical rules. So we end up with philosophical disputes on when logic should be applied rigorously and when some form of outside reason should be considered, because if we were purely in the realm of logic and couldn't operate by any other rules, we'd be forced to say that heaps don't exist. Not that they are subjective or vague since such things aren't allowed. Either heap or not heap.


    No you could argue that it is true that human language has developed a vague and subjective term know as the "heap" in a binary logical system. It would be false to say that heap as a specific quantity exists but it would be true to say that heap as a concept exists. And it would be true to say that that concept, as a result of being developed by human beings with a tendency towards generalization in casual conversation, is vauge. So it would be the case of a complex truth we mentioned before. That still is objectively and absolutely true.

  10. #510
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pseudo View Post
    No you could argue that it is true that human language has developed a vague and subjective term know as the "heap" in a binary logical system. It would be false to say that heap as a specific quantity exists but it would be true to say that heap as a concept exists. And it would be true to say that that concept is vauge. So it would be the case of a complex truth we mentioned before.
    Yes we can say that it's true that heap exists as a concept since it obviously does. That doesn't necessarily let you say that it's true that a given x is a heap, because if you do you are saying it definitely is that thing, which is not being vague. This is actually what causes the paradox to work - the fact that a heap can't be treated as a specific quantity means that if you acknowledge anything as being a heap, such as hairs on your head, and you diminish it by one and it is still a heap, you end up with a boundary problem. When does it stop being a heap?

    Edit: on that note, Hysteresis allows you to define a heap in a meaningful way that gets around the problem of quantities. The 'heap' in this case doesn't have to actually be an objective quantity and you can actually work with the heap in a meaningful and predictable way. Practical solution that doesn't have to argue about what is true in order to actually let you do something functional.

    It goes beyond trivial academics and makes the concept of 'heap' something that one can actually use.

Similar Threads

  1. Older woman younger man
    By Butterfly in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 05-17-2012, 06:27 AM
  2. [NF] F woman and T man
    By INTPness in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-15-2010, 03:22 AM
  3. [NF] If you had infinite money,land, and man-power... What would you do for fun?
    By ObeyBunny in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-10-2010, 12:05 AM
  4. The good life and man's relation to society
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 07-23-2008, 11:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO