Banno

Well, ok, against my better judgement, ...didn't you say something abut everything being energy?

But... (...no, Banno, don't... just leave it...)

His hat!

See Godel, God, and knowledge by way of an example.

The Game of Life simulated on the Game of life - very cool. I didn't note anything new, although this is a particularly clear pop-explanation. Nice.

I said it is not a first-order predicate - you know, it's second order, predicating over other predicates, like in predicate calculus. No contradictio...

Where? I went looking and could not see mention of predication. You did say: ...which seems to me to conflate the first order "triangles have three si...

Thanks. Indeed, that's a generalisation of the first theorem. In a given formal system complex enough to do arithmetic there are statements which can ...

Simply repeating the error of treating existence as a first-order predicate doesn't address my objection. It's a common objection; from Kant, who is c...

I'm not sure what you think an unprovable proposition is. Can you give an example?

Nothing to be done. ...with a supreme effort @"Banno" succeeds in pulling off his boot. He peers inside it, feels about inside it, turns it upside dow...

Well, no, I don't believe there exists something better than god, nor there exists a god, for that matter. It's the treating existence as a predicate ...

So there you are again. I'm glad to see you back. I thought you were gone forever. Together again at last! We'll have to celebrate this. But how?

I don't like the idea of god. I'm pretty sure I've not hidden that view. It seems that those who have thought spiritually see sense in nonsense. I don...

Yep. What's to be done? Will @"Gregory" stop and do some more work on understanding Gödel, or double down with more poor argumentation?

Well said. There's an odd sort of self-deception needed to accept such arguments.

Your account looks pretty accurate to me. This argument does nto show that hte universe could not have an infinite past. SO the question arrises as to...

You haven't understood Gödel. You think god knows the proofs of those statements for which there is no proof.

You think god knows the proofs of those statements for which there is no proof. You might like to think on that some more.

I don't think so. Just thought you might enjoy giving it a go. A something to give the impression we exist, if you like. After all, that's what we do.

Just contra @"baker"; and chastising @"fishfry" for perhaps being too selective in the examples he considers. On consideration, the posters here have ...

@"Manuel", The OP is an opportunity to apply Austin's approach... It crosses mathematical logic and religion. Care for a go?

Nothing to be done.

...and so the point is not to blame science for what are social problems.

Well, read what he wrote. I'm trying to be nice, but people say such silly things.

Ah, so you've met Scott Morrison, then. I'm assuming that those who think science is mostly a good thing took a look at the title of this thread and t...

Much as I had supposed. Partisan bullshit predominates.

It's so much easier to critique stuff you haven't understood.

Nothing to do with Dennett's "Quining Qualia"

Throw her in the lake; If she floats, she's a witch; if she drowns, then not. Others here have supposed that science is bad precisely because it throw...

...almost.

:razz: What do you get if you add "-ism" to "social"...? Or perhaps to "Community..."?

You are way off the topic here. Still. Despite my request. Indeed, the post above is a mad rant. Here's some more considered thoughts: Divisive COVID ...

What you call statism is what is commonly called society or sometimes community.

It's not real, it's an illusion. It's not real, it's a fake. It's not real, it's a forgery. It's not real, it's a toy. It's not real, it's a hologram....

Oh, indeed. But a look around the posts here shows an antipathy that you might agree is pathological. Plagues, historically, have been proportionally ...

Tracking Australia’s COVID vaccine rollout numbers

Redacted. Got my and's and or's confused. Sleep time.

Allow me to re-phrase: this is a philosophy forum, not a forum for the analysis of epidemiology. What are the philosophical considerations? Have they ...

Has anyone actually addressed the ethics?

AH, well, that was a waste of time. As if the abacus emerged perfect and complete from the mind of one individual. No, it emerged over time, through m...

Has anyone actually addressed the ethics?

But you said: ...as if you had to have the concept "laptop" before you encountered a laptop or hear anything about it. You can't see the problem there...

As argued, if this were so we would never learn; we would require the concept in order to recognise the concept. So that's wrong.

What's most striking about this thread is the parsing of an ethical decision as if it were a calculation of odds.

But you do not need to count all the numbers in order to understand what it involves. One learns counting by doing; pass me three block, tell me how m...

How rude.

I remember the Apple 2c. And the Powerbook 100. The notion of "laptop" developed over time. You did learn to count.

Think carefully about that. The same applies to everything else of which you conceive. If it is true, then we have no explanation for how we might lea...