Dopson's Paradox
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:26 pm
For the discussion of all things philosophical, especially articles in the magazine Philosophy Now.
https://forum.philosophynow.org/
I managed 9 minutes, roy, and then the tedium engulfed me.roydop wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:26 pm "This statement is not being read."
https://youtu.be/Dy-4zt_ebRY?si=jgSV8TRGfN-3cel3
There's nothing paradoxical or profound about it. It's just a misuse of language - a meaningless/useless string of scribbles. Just because you can arbitrarily arrange scribbles in a certain way that follows some arbitrary rules, does not mean that those scribbles refer to, or represent, anything useful.roydop wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:26 pm "This statement is not being read."
https://youtu.be/Dy-4zt_ebRY?si=jgSV8TRGfN-3cel3
So the same can be said of: "This statement is false.", which is what spurred Godel to discover the most profound revelation about logical systems.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:10 pmThere's nothing paradoxical or profound about it. It's just a misuse of language - a meaningless/useless string of scribbles. Just because you can arbitrarily arrange scribbles in a certain way that follows some arbitrary rules, does not mean that those scribbles refer to, or represent, anything useful.roydop wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:26 pm "This statement is not being read."
https://youtu.be/Dy-4zt_ebRY?si=jgSV8TRGfN-3cel3
I've read the statement and I don't know what it means, not because I don't want to know, but because the statement does not provide enough information to determine what is true or false about it. WHAT about the statement is false? What would make it either true or false - more information. Without that information, it is a meaningless string of scribbles.roydop wrote: ↑Sun Apr 07, 2024 3:41 pmSo the same can be said of: "This statement is false.", which is what spurred Godel to discover the most profound revelation about logical systems.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:10 pmThere's nothing paradoxical or profound about it. It's just a misuse of language - a meaningless/useless string of scribbles. Just because you can arbitrarily arrange scribbles in a certain way that follows some arbitrary rules, does not mean that those scribbles refer to, or represent, anything useful.roydop wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 3:26 pm "This statement is not being read."
https://youtu.be/Dy-4zt_ebRY?si=jgSV8TRGfN-3cel3
Dopson's paradox doesn't mean anything to you because you don't want to know what it means. If you are intellectually incapable of understanding what the statement is relating, then you are either an idiot or in denial/delusion.
What are, for example, the solutions in this case? What are the states?Superposition is a quantum principle that refers to a physical system that exists in multiple states simultaneously based on a specific set of solutions. The most commonly used set of solutions is all possible solutions, also known as Hilbert space. In quantum physics, the Hilbert space is the mathematical representation of all the possible states the system can take. If my system is a spinning electron, its Hilbert space is spin up and spin down, since these are the two possible options for the spin direction.
2+2=4 makes no sense to me.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sun Apr 07, 2024 4:02 pmI've read the statement and I don't know what it means, not because I don't want to know, but because the statement does not provide enough information to determine what is true or false about it. WHAT about the statement is false? What would make it either true or false - more information. Without that information, it is a meaningless string of scribbles.roydop wrote: ↑Sun Apr 07, 2024 3:41 pmSo the same can be said of: "This statement is false.", which is what spurred Godel to discover the most profound revelation about logical systems.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:10 pm
There's nothing paradoxical or profound about it. It's just a misuse of language - a meaningless/useless string of scribbles. Just because you can arbitrarily arrange scribbles in a certain way that follows some arbitrary rules, does not mean that those scribbles refer to, or represent, anything useful.
Dopson's paradox doesn't mean anything to you because you don't want to know what it means. If you are intellectually incapable of understanding what the statement is relating, then you are either an idiot or in denial/delusion.
"This statement is not written in English" at least provides more information about what could be false or true about it.
Instead of making odd assumptions about my willingness to understand, how about trying to help me understand? If you have something to teach, I'm all ears.
What makes 2+2=4 true or false? Don't you have to know what the scribbles refer to to know what makes it true or false? What does 2 refer to? What does + and = refer to? There must be some meaning to the scribbles for it to be defined as true or false. This is how language and math works. Without some real-world meaning behind the scribbles, they are just scribbles.
How would you determine the truth value of the statement, "Sarah is black and white." The statement follows the rules of the English language, but what does it mean? What is it referring to, and how would you determine what it means and whether it is true or not if not by making some kind of observation (using your senses) of Sarah?
One can make a logical hypothesis or theory, but if that hypothesis or theory does not fit observations, it is false. So logic alone, and observation alone does not make one true or false. What is true or false is confirmed by both logic AND observation.
You're contradicting yourself. Is it a lie or does it not make sense to you? It cannot be both. Either it does make sense in which case you can call it a lie, or it makes no sense, as in it is just a string of scribbles on the screen.roydop wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 3:26 pm2+2=4 makes no sense to me.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sun Apr 07, 2024 4:02 pmI've read the statement and I don't know what it means, not because I don't want to know, but because the statement does not provide enough information to determine what is true or false about it. WHAT about the statement is false? What would make it either true or false - more information. Without that information, it is a meaningless string of scribbles.roydop wrote: ↑Sun Apr 07, 2024 3:41 pm
So the same can be said of: "This statement is false.", which is what spurred Godel to discover the most profound revelation about logical systems.
Dopson's paradox doesn't mean anything to you because you don't want to know what it means. If you are intellectually incapable of understanding what the statement is relating, then you are either an idiot or in denial/delusion.
"This statement is not written in English" at least provides more information about what could be false or true about it.
Instead of making odd assumptions about my willingness to understand, how about trying to help me understand? If you have something to teach, I'm all ears.
What makes 2+2=4 true or false? Don't you have to know what the scribbles refer to to know what makes it true or false? What does 2 refer to? What does + and = refer to? There must be some meaning to the scribbles for it to be defined as true or false. This is how language and math works. Without some real-world meaning behind the scribbles, they are just scribbles.
How would you determine the truth value of the statement, "Sarah is black and white." The statement follows the rules of the English language, but what does it mean? What is it referring to, and how would you determine what it means and whether it is true or not if not by making some kind of observation (using your senses) of Sarah?
One can make a logical hypothesis or theory, but if that hypothesis or theory does not fit observations, it is false. So logic alone, and observation alone does not make one true or false. What is true or false is confirmed by both logic AND observation.
https://www.nonconceptuality.org/post/t ... -and-logic
So, your statement, "All language is a deception and all of humanity has fallen for it. This is the fundamental cause of all suffering." is a lie? If language is a deception, then how can you use language to inform me that it's use is deception?roydop wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:13 pm All language is a deception and all of humanity has fallen for it. This is the fundamental cause of all suffering.
Humanity is in this state of delusion due to it being mesmerized by thought and language. In order to contact someone in delusion they must be contacted in the delusion. This is the purpose of MESSAGE. I have correctly interpreted the messages that have been implanted within consciousness in an attempt to break it out of its delusion. So symbol and language, which is the system that projects the delusion, is used only insomuch as to deliver the message.
If you don't SEE or "GET" the message, I can't make it any more succinct or obvious. Either one is ready for Reality or one isn't
https://www.nonconceptuality.org/1-fund ... of-reality
It parallels his framing of Godel as saying that all systems of thought are false. Which is not what Godel showed or said.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:36 pm So, your statement, "All language is a deception and all of humanity has fallen for it. This is the fundamental cause of all suffering." is a lie? If language is a deception, then how can you use language to inform me that it's use is deception?
But how can you point to something in your imagination, or to something experienced before you could tell someone else about it? You cannot do any of that without using language to contain. Everyday language use does not only contain, but points as well. Having language that enables you to do both point and contain would be more useful than a language that only does one.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2024 4:34 amIt parallels his framing of Godel as saying that all systems of thought are false. Which is not what Godel showed or said.Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:36 pm So, your statement, "All language is a deception and all of humanity has fallen for it. This is the fundamental cause of all suffering." is a lie? If language is a deception, then how can you use language to inform me that it's use is deception?
It also contrasts with traditions that are critical of the effects of language on us, and who use non-verbal means to extricate people from the way thought functions in them. Not by arguing that it's all lies or false - which is, as you point out, self-contradictory - but by trying to give people experiences that are different from the ones they get when they relate to language and thought in the ways they currently do. Zen Buddhism, for example, with meditation, Koans and using language to point rather than to contain. I'm not arguing for Zen Buddhism, but it seems to understand or at least avoids the problems of arguing that language is all lies in a series of videos with all sorts of assertions in language about reality, what we should do, what is going on, what the problem is, what's coming in the world (if we don't listen to him also for us) and so on.