2
   

Truth is a choice

 
 
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:16 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

My definition on close inspection does not contradict the one you presented, but instead points out to transcendental elsewhere systems that may for all we know have true value...nevertheless it does not relate them once the premisses cannot follow from each other in the same system...


If you could have written that with a transcendental ink pen, I think we could have followed it better. OHHHMMMM.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:19 pm
@NoOne phil,
It concerns the problem of knowledge as also includes the notion of locality, but I guess that you are far to lost in the past to keep up with it...what do you think general relativity is all about ?
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:22 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

It concerns the problem of knowledge as also includes the notion of locality, but I guess that you are far to lost in the past to keep up with it...


Oh yes, I often get cofused. I use to be a lic. electronics tech. I was always found wandering down the street wondering how the image on the tv screens got there and where they existed before that.

Well, the boss begged me not to leave, but I had a mission, so I started a long journey trying to find the ghost in the machine.
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:25 pm
@NoOne phil,
Quote:
Oh yes, I often get cofused. I use to be a lic. electronics tech. I was always found wandering down the street wondering how the image on the tv screens got there and where they existed before that.


Laughing
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:26 pm
@NoOne phil,
You should quit Philosophy and start a comedy act, humour is definitely your thing ! Wink
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:28 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

You should quit Philosophy and start a comedy act, humour is definitely your thing ! Wink


Some shrinks say the two often run parallel. I am amazed at all the humor missed in the works of Plato.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:41 pm
Quote:
Oh yes, I often get cofused. I use to be a lic. electronics tech. I was always found wandering down the street wondering how the image on the tv screens got there and where they existed before that.
Well, the boss begged me not to leave, but I had a mission, so I started a long journey trying to find the ghost in the machine.



Several of the main stream theory´s in Physic nowadays support the idea of the existence of several parallel Universes alternate to the one we actually live with step by step small variations of every decision/diverse path that we or any X takes along a contextual space/time frame...on that account it is acceptable and actually conceivable to stablish an innumerable probability of variations of X, in which X1, X2, X 3, and so on although not equal can be taken as a larger frame of the Identity of X...
...now of course the stupid display of ignorance that you just showed above cannot account for such implications...
You has most of those around you cannot but grasp the obvious in a linear frame of mind...one just has to read the pathetic high regard in which you take yourself on your ridiculous postings.
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:44 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Several of the main stream theory´s in Physic nowadays support the idea of the existence of several parallel Universes alternate to the one we actually live with step by step small variations of every decision/diverse path that we or any X takes along a contextual space/time frame...on that account it is acceptable and actually conceivable to stablish an innumerable probability of variations of X, in which X1, X2, X 3, and so on although not equal can be taken as a larger frame of the Identity of X...
...now of course the stupid display of ignorance that you just showed above cannot account for such implications...
You has most of those around you cannot but grasp the obvious in a linear frame of mind...one just has to read the pathetic high regard in which you take yourself on your ridiculous postings.


Yes, I have a very constrained mind. In fact, very similar to some ancient Greeks, who were not that bright either. You see, they believed that for language to be possible, you had to agree upon terms, i.e. a standard. Now that standard is the standard from which each could abstract on. This way their words were grounded in reality. In fact, this is the foundation of all logic, well defined terms. Which means, if you cannot name that which is abstractable, in your environment and mine, and anyone else who wants to monkey around, you are talking out your ass. . . . . in fact, by definition, unless there is something present before us both, you cannot even use the word belief.

Language is conventional. No way around it.

Further more, I see most people speaking of these theories who cannot even do things that are right in front of their face. Convince me that they can do the very difficult, but not something easy.

The fact that I can do what they could not and said impossible in Geometry, testifies to my stupid pragmatic nature.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:54 pm
@NoOne phil,
We do have to agree upon terms when its useful to do so...often in Philosophy the usefulness of disagreement becomes evident...
It is the case to for you to say (the obvious again) that what is to be transcendent may not be worth speculating, and yet, nevertheless, such possibility on own its own raises sufficient doubt upon what is to be taken as "real" to find itself a purpose...
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 02:55 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

We do have to agree upon terms when its useful to do so...often in Philosophy the usefulness of disagreement becomes evident...
It is the case to for you to say (the obvious again) that what is to be transcendent may not be worth speculating, and yet, nevertheless such raises sufficient doubt upon what is to be taken as "real" to find itself a purpose...


You left your blender running.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 03:01 pm
@NoOne phil,
I wonder with a inevitable smile in my mind how do you deal with Cantor´s Infinity´s...how much space is there between each of your neurons axons, eh ? Mr. Green
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 03:13 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
A few yeas ago, I did an ebook of Cantor's work.
You have got to be kidding.
When I was a child going to school, I could spot contradiction after contradiction in school texts, I had hoped that those who were celebrated for their intellect would do much better.
Some day I will post my critique of Cantor, but right now it is low priority. I have alread done the complete text in Word, it is still waiting for me.

One item though--Cantor's infinity? Hello. There are two, and only two elements, I don't think that hair brained Cantor invented either of them. .

Right now I am waiting on the Internet archive to derive my last upload, ebook and audio book, a book on Plato by Adam back in 1913. Not big, the audio is about 3 hours 10 min.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 03:31 pm
@NoOne phil,
Please keep in mind all who are blind and those who have reading comprehension problems as myself!
because not all of your work has sound. Thanks, Reasoning logic
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 04:01 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:

Please keep in mind all who are blind and those who have reading comprehension problems as myself!
because not all of your work has sound. Thanks, Reasoning logic


Actually, most of it is not my work. But what ever I do, I have to do the ebooks before the audio. I make audio-books for myself, and post them for those who have little or no time to read. I reallly would like to get the audio done on the ebooks sets I did, especially the Harvard Classics--I did them from a nice set I got off ebay, but that is a ton of work. Actually it is all a ton of work, mind you I am working alone on all of this, I have a full time job, and am a single parent.
0 Replies
 
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 04:12 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:

It concerns the problem of knowledge as also includes the notion of locality, but I guess that you are far to lost in the past to keep up with it...what do you think general relativity is all about ?


General Relativity, I did one of Einstein's book in ebook format, depends upon non-Euclidean Geometry. That can be disproven in one small paragraph. It is in my Language posting. Step by Step.
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 04:18 pm
@NoOne phil,
When you guys are done hijacking this thread, maybe we can get back to the topic at hand.

NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 04:22 pm
@Cyracuz,
Cyracuz wrote:

When you guys are done hijacking this thread, maybe we can get back to the topic at hand.


Until you become my mother, piss off.
Cyracuz
 
  0  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 04:32 pm
@NoOne phil,
Let me get this straight... You come into this thread. Misunderstand what it's about and proceed to ridicule me for making it up.
Then you start to discuss what you think it ought to be about with another scrub who has already put me on ignore after failing to give a reasonable explanation of his ideas, as if my demanding such a thing was reason enough to ignore me.

And you tell me to piss off?
Man, I am an otherwise peaceful fellow who will go far to keep the peace, but if this were a discussion around a table, and you acted as you have in this thread, you would not have any teeth left.
NoOne phil
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 04:34 pm
@Cyracuz,
There you go with that imagination of yours, that was another posts of your own off topic.

Oh, damn, now I have to change my pants. sthop that!
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Oct, 2010 04:49 pm
@Cyracuz,
Cyracuz wrote:

In all aspects of life where fact alone does not satisfy the coherency of percpetion, belief is what decides what is truth.

And in all such aspects, truth is strictly a matter of choice. Ours and our ancestors' choice.

Does anyone care to dispute this claim?


I would say that you have it correct on the first part but the secound part it does seem to be wrong to me. This secound part does not only seem to include choice alone.
The reason I say this is because it seems as though our environment has a factor in our psychology.
Example if you were born in a different country your religion, ethical and political views very well may be different.
Now it does depend on some things, if you are able to understand this, "as in some countries logic has no value to a majority of people and even in some countries where logic is valued there are still some that do not value it, so comprehension will not take place.
I do apologize for shaing other view points within your thread with others.
Now that I know that you take offence to it I will try not to do it in your threads again.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Truth is a choice
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/20/2022 at 02:28:04