You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

jorndoe

Comments

Where B is the operator for belief, you can be without or with beliefs for proposition p: 1. someone does not believe p: ¬Bp 2. someone believes not p...
February 06, 2020 at 00:00
Like disbelief that Santa is real is a belief system? Like a clean bill of health is a disease? • absence of theism: newborns, the Pirahã people, some...
February 05, 2020 at 23:07
Gave me a good grin: Noah From The Bible Didn't Retire, So This Likely GOP Gubernatorial Candidate Doesn't See Why You Should Samantha Lachman HuffPos...
February 05, 2020 at 22:42
Me? Any will do, depending on context I suppose. ?0 is a quantity that's not a real number, and ?0 is the quantity of naturals/integers/rationals ?1 i...
January 29, 2020 at 20:11
How's this, then? Loosely, ? is a quantity that's not a number, and one ? is the quantity of numbers.
January 29, 2020 at 04:32
To simulate the universe in every detail would require more than just the simulation itself, presumably a good deal more, considering what we know abo...
January 27, 2020 at 04:50
A. assume infinite past moments B. then there's no 1st moment C. or 2nd ... or nth moment D. so A can't be numbered with a 1st ... nth moment E. ? You...
January 21, 2020 at 22:59
I'm not so interested in your analogies per se, I'm just pointing out that the argument you keep posting doesn't work. The argument I've commented on ...
January 20, 2020 at 17:50
, the worst that can happen if we act, is no worse than doing nothing, but could be better. (Wouldn't it be cool if we don't have to do a thing, and c...
January 20, 2020 at 01:20
Has Luboš Motl's theorizing been established (verified and not falsified)?
January 20, 2020 at 00:26
Didn't you show with B and C? We can label events (A) in whichever way we standardize/choose, indexically, but not non-indexically.
January 19, 2020 at 18:48
Still doesn't follow: D. So A cannot be numbered so Repeating a non-sequitur doesn't somehow make it so.
January 19, 2020 at 15:28
We don't go shit where our children eat either. What's the worst that can happen if we act on climate change? What's the worst that can happen if we d...
January 19, 2020 at 00:56
Not "atemporal", then. "Atemporal" mind doesn't make sense anyway. You can come up with falsifiability that we can go out and check tomorrow? (y) (the...
January 14, 2020 at 17:49
Hm. Wouldn't the supposed fine-tuner of the universe have to be uniquely fine-tuned to create fine-tuned universes? Surely can't be mere coincidence.....
January 14, 2020 at 17:00
Then you'll need a proof without going by that. FYI, not that it matters much, I harbor no particular personal belief either way. I'm just pointing ou...
January 14, 2020 at 16:32
Just thought I'd point out that your D still doesn't follow. :D D. So the infinitude in A can't be numbered so
January 14, 2020 at 04:25
Sweden Bans The Religious Indoctrination Of Children Andrew Hall Jun 2019 Pinchy :D
January 12, 2020 at 22:53
I suppose we can be grateful to some of the Arabs and Muslims for attempting to keep ancient Greek writings alive during the Middle Ages, the Islamic ...
January 12, 2020 at 06:22
Neither logic, mathematics nor the scientific methodologies have any inherent dependencies on Christianity. That's just hijacking. ("if you can't beat...
January 12, 2020 at 04:45
Mind reading fallacy? (I'm entirely irrelevant.)
January 09, 2020 at 02:06
As shown, we already know some things about mind (versus whatever else), and these are inherently contrary to "atemporal". Special pleading. So, we're...
January 08, 2020 at 13:22
Hilbert's hotel, ? Like Shandy's diary, a veridical paradox, i.e. counterintuitive, yet does not otherwise derive a contradiction.
January 08, 2020 at 13:08
Example square circle: "atemporal" mind. It's more or less the opposite, if you will. Where body (for example) is object-like and spatial (left to rig...
January 08, 2020 at 04:01
Sure, which is not proof. Maybe? I've just addressed a couple of them — Leibnizian sufficient reason and your mathematical induction (and similar) — n...
January 08, 2020 at 03:46
Repeating won't make this right: 4. so we have no such numbering of such moments
January 07, 2020 at 19:34
I'm thinking lack of (or poor) education is a factor. We know that educated women have less children, for example, so it's a factor in overpopulation ...
January 06, 2020 at 18:41
A different deduction, then. Cool, let's have it. (y) (Despite the connotations, mathematical induction is fine as far as deduction goes.) Let's have ...
January 05, 2020 at 21:57
Then what's 1st and nth about here? ? So, without such a 1st moment, you can't number such moments like that. (y) (though whatever indexical numbering...
January 05, 2020 at 20:35
Errata (already shown in the thread): 5. such time has no such numbering of moments
January 05, 2020 at 14:26
Augustine had a somewhat humorous take on that stuff. :)
January 04, 2020 at 16:49
If ... ... then a 1st moment is "undefined". Then you've started out with a contradiction. Anyway, still no proof, then. Leibnizian sufficient reason ...
January 04, 2020 at 16:39
Gah non sequitur again. Sure they can; you can use whatever numbering. Let's put up a temporal flag pole (indexical) at 1970 Jan 1st 00:00:00 UTC, and...
January 03, 2020 at 19:47
Just did ... 1. suppose there's no 1st cause 2. if there's no nth cause, then there's no n+1th cause 3. so, by induction such causes don't have such (...
January 03, 2020 at 18:55
Not so. You've shown that such causes don't have such (definite) numbers, that such causes aren't numbered so. (y) But 3 is a non sequitur. (That's ro...
January 03, 2020 at 16:30
, not exactly a cool start. :sad:
January 03, 2020 at 06:40
, looks (to me) like you want to show that you can't number all such moments non-indexically, but then you call it a day there, still no contradiction...
January 03, 2020 at 06:36
You haven't. Mostly just something like "... which is impossible", no contradiction derived. The opening post started out with Leibnizian sufficient r...
January 02, 2020 at 21:21
"Wigner's Friend" reminded me a bit of the twin paradox, though they're very different. The former is still very specific in setting and results, wher...
January 02, 2020 at 04:42
You keep saying so without showing it. :confused:
January 01, 2020 at 23:31
Well, merely saying so doesn't make it so. Can you at least deduce a contradiction then?
January 01, 2020 at 22:14
How does that work? Can you set it out concisely?
January 01, 2020 at 21:36
An atemporal, "eternal" cause of a universe that has a definite age (like 14 billion years) is incompatible with the principle of sufficient reason, s...
January 01, 2020 at 20:24
In: Why x=x ?  — view comment
Merely declaring so is much like saying the Moon didn't exist until onlookers noticed it in the sky. We differentiate perception and the perceived; al...
January 01, 2020 at 02:38
Whether they can be said to exist or not, these are abstract objects, not my sandals. :) The formalisms, theorems, etc, is how you treat them, you don...
December 27, 2019 at 03:18
, MathJax is supported: \displaystyle\frac{1}{3} = \displaystyle\sum_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \frac{3}{10^n} = 0.333\cdots where \mathbb{N} does not include...
December 27, 2019 at 02:47
, just in case you're new around here, these things come up every now and then — Zeno "impossible!" ? "paradox" 1/0 ... — usually due to some misunder...
December 26, 2019 at 00:51
While at it with the "paradoxes", here's Aristotle's wheel: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/gifs/AristotlesWheel.gif :)
December 26, 2019 at 00:41
(y)
December 26, 2019 at 00:22
In: Why x=x ?  — view comment
(I suppose your inquiry itself is meaningless, if identity was abandoned; not just your inquiry, every inquiry.) There cannot be anything in particula...
December 26, 2019 at 00:19