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

InPitzotl

Comments

I'm not sure this actually describes a physical system well, or that saying that this is "the ambition of science" says anything meaningful. Maxwell's...
July 11, 2020 at 23:42
Just as an additional point of clarification... once Mary sees red for the first time (fast forward through all of the "learning how to see" red to th...
July 11, 2020 at 23:28
It's a bit tough to talk about since in my mind the specs are a bit fuzzy. These tournaments I describe are often playing with some game theoretical s...
July 11, 2020 at 21:29
If information simply went back in time at all, it would be a "resulting" physical state that is also a "prior" physical state, but being a physical s...
July 11, 2020 at 20:21
...or, we're implemented by the atoms.
July 11, 2020 at 00:13
There seems to be some suspect "I am not part of the universe" kind of thing going on in this reasoning.
July 09, 2020 at 05:21
If scientific is the standard and this is the rationale, I would think you should be skeptical of both Napoleon Hill's and Dunning-and-Kruger's studie...
July 09, 2020 at 03:31
Oh I'm not so interested in the actual Napoleon Hill, as I am in the epistemic standard being employed (though I would like to imagine Napoleon Hill p...
July 09, 2020 at 03:23
Were they scientific, though? You know, as opposed to those unscientific Dunning-Kruger studies?
July 09, 2020 at 03:20
... What scientific methods did Napoleon Hill employ?
July 09, 2020 at 03:18
...but I'm not sure I get the point of playing the Münchhausen trilemma as a game.
July 09, 2020 at 02:28
It's a fine point in the mechanics you describe. Suppose we're mulling over three options; A, B, and C. In terms of "effort" they may rank B, A, C; in...
July 08, 2020 at 05:45
You're mistaken in where your unwarranted assumption lies. This presumes that there are hazy assertions. Under a charitable interpretation, you misrea...
July 07, 2020 at 05:58
Sorry; let me rephrase this more simply... you're making an unwarranted assumption.
July 07, 2020 at 03:56
Okay. Your footnote for 1 was here: "Free ... to choose the lesser one" admits to a potential interpretation that the lesser is part of the considerat...
July 07, 2020 at 03:35
Out of interest, I offer the view that this is a bit too "easy" of a theory, and there's reason to suspect it can't quite work this way (this is quite...
July 06, 2020 at 23:21
They're distinct... Laplace's demon has free omniscience... Maxwell's demon's knowledge has costs.
July 06, 2020 at 13:27
Depends on the discussion... the conversation about epistemic limits reminded me a lot about Maxwell's demon.
July 06, 2020 at 13:11
That's absurd... no competent physicist would even attempt such a thing. They would use a demon.
July 06, 2020 at 13:01
Oh you silly confused soul, seeing liars behind your eyelids. I suppose you also see lies in the fact that 3*3=9, given we're multiplying two threes a...
July 05, 2020 at 20:07
Alright I'll play. What is the nature of this deception?
July 05, 2020 at 18:07
Yes, but it's quite ineffective... we already knew you weren't here to learn. Along the same lines, I never heard that paragraph after the one you quo...
July 05, 2020 at 17:53
Good question. 1 is the product of zero primes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_product Where have you looked? Or am I your personal search engine...
July 05, 2020 at 15:11
MU has a metaphysical theory of numbers, he's a believer in them in the full b-word sense (it's part of his identity... almost literally), and modern ...
July 05, 2020 at 05:49
What are you talking about, "problem" and "required"? The fundamental theorem of arithmetic states, in the modern reading, that all positive integers ...
July 05, 2020 at 03:05
... ...while we're on the subject, what does the very next paragraph say? Welcome to the year 2020. So what's the problem? ...so where does that leave...
July 04, 2020 at 15:04
And you're immune to it? It was meant to be an analogy... primes are numbers, but not all numbers are prime, was the point. But apparently you're even...
July 04, 2020 at 05:02
Sorry, but we haven't resolved that there's an actual problem here (not to me, or to anyone else here that I've seen). If turtles are animals, why do ...
July 03, 2020 at 13:56
Lousy example. The number's representation is no more the number than you are a white M in a pink rectangle. You keep telling people to take a look at...
July 03, 2020 at 02:42
Call me crazy, but why isn't a base 9 and a base 10 representation of the same number a base 9 and base 10 representation of the same number?
July 03, 2020 at 00:58
Oh that's rich. ^^ 1/9 is that thing. ^^ distraction. FYI, under the rationals, there's no such thing as 1/infinity.
July 01, 2020 at 13:28
So we can't divide a pizza into 9 slices because the slices don't weigh the same, and we can't divide 1 into 9 because 9 isn't infinity. Sorry MU, but...
July 01, 2020 at 12:52
It is the case that you do not understand. By just doing so. I gave you an example, which is quite relevant, to help you understand. You ignored it. B...
July 01, 2020 at 05:09
So, the answer to the question of what the remainder of 0.(142857) is, is that there is in fact a remainder, it's clearly evident, mathematicians ough...
June 30, 2020 at 13:30
No, your imagine did. There are people who argue against LFW on the basis that there can only be determined and random things... if it's determined it...
June 30, 2020 at 07:11
What I mean is something like this: ... ...no; blaming the mathematicians for your not finding the remainder is not healthy skepticism. You didn't ans...
June 30, 2020 at 06:42
Meta's still playing with rocks while the rest of us have pointy sticks.
June 29, 2020 at 23:31
Wrong. To persuade is to convince someone that something is true. You are, in my estimation, unpersuadeable; you've invested huge chunks of your time ...
June 29, 2020 at 14:06
Multiple things. Playing a game. I'm trying to see how much perspective I can give you about your lack of competence in this area... that you're uncoo...
June 29, 2020 at 04:11
We've been through this MU. We're not debating... you're under the delusion that we're having a debate... that my goal is to persuade you, that I'm tr...
June 28, 2020 at 17:59
That's quite hedged... "closed" seems to imply not getting energy from somewhere else, and "simple" can mean anything. Regardless, there's not necessa...
June 28, 2020 at 03:24
Good... you're caught up then. Wrong. The fraction part of a mixed number specifies an exact portion of a unit. We can only say that 3/9=1/3 insofar a...
June 28, 2020 at 02:29
@"Metaphysician Undercover" <- look MU... free attention, freely given! I think the most important thing here is, what is MU's criteria for truth? MU ...
June 27, 2020 at 13:36
Prove it.
June 27, 2020 at 12:46
Unfortunately for you, that's not how language works. English is the language we speak, but it's also a relationship with England, and a type of spin ...
June 27, 2020 at 03:29
Color me surprised. You're only demonstrating your incompetence, over and over. You're just proving you don't speak the language. Wrong. The exact rat...
June 26, 2020 at 07:41
It just sounds interesting. :smile: I think we wind up at the same spot. You're correct IMO... I don't think we disagree... I think we're seeing the s...
June 25, 2020 at 23:04
But that's a false front... people with "opinions" like this don't generally hold the opinions because of the justifications they give; rather, they g...
June 25, 2020 at 11:00
By definition, division is the inverse of multiplying. Silly MU. Given any integer a; and any nonzero integers b, c, d: \displaystyle \frac{a}{b} \div...
June 25, 2020 at 04:38
^-- One of those two things is a lie. Most charitably, you're incapable of using the language. ^-- This is straight up paranoia. Deception has two par...
June 24, 2020 at 13:09