Search found 6868 matches

by Eodnhoj7
Wed May 05, 2021 1:56 am
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion
Replies: 39
Views: 385

Re: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion

That’s correct. And since you cannot know what you think you know, you can only believe what you think you know. False, belief based ignorance is based upon beleif based justifications. Yes, but what you say about ignorance says nothing to address the belief that something is actually known. Knowle...
by Eodnhoj7
Wed May 05, 2021 1:32 am
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion
Replies: 39
Views: 385

Re: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion

Yes, all knowledge negates all belief-based ignorances by replacing them with belief-based truisms. You can only "believe" in something if you don't actually know it. That’s correct. And since you cannot know what you think you know, you can only believe what you think you know. False, belief based...
by Eodnhoj7
Wed May 05, 2021 1:31 am
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion
Replies: 39
Views: 385

Re: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion

All knowledge negates all belief-based ignorance(s) ad infinitum . Yes, all knowledge negates all belief-based ignorances by replacing them with belief-based truisms. You can only "believe" in something if you don't actually know it. Confusing belief for knowledge is like confusing darkness with li...
by Eodnhoj7
Wed May 05, 2021 1:24 am
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Unity and Multiplicity not Being and Nothing
Replies: 0
Views: 18

Unity and Multiplicity not Being and Nothing

Nothingness cannot be observe except through the multiplicity of phenomenon. Under the experiment of observing complete void only the self is observed thus necessitating the subjective state of the "I" observing the subjective state of the "I" therefore two or more "I's" being observed: the "I" obse...
by Eodnhoj7
Wed May 05, 2021 1:01 am
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Proof of Nothing
Replies: 21
Views: 210

Re: Proof of Nothing

To place nothing as part of a two sided coin, ie one side, is to equate nothing to something thus it is no longer nothing. Dually I stated nothing can neither be proven or disproven. To prove nothing is to prove nothing thus an absence of proof exists as nothing cannot be proven. To disprove nothin...
by Eodnhoj7
Wed May 05, 2021 12:40 am
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: P = -P
Replies: 56
Views: 1494

Re: P = -P

This is simply you not understanding normal language usage. "And" is addition...there is nothing else to understand. When we talk about "a thing 'and itself'" we're not talking about addition. So if that's the way you're reading it, you're not understanding normal language usage. False, you are fai...
by Eodnhoj7
Tue May 04, 2021 6:38 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: P = -P
Replies: 56
Views: 1494

Re: P = -P

Terrapin Station wrote: Tue May 04, 2021 9:31 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 10:55 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: Mon May 03, 2021 9:40 pm

So when you're doing addition, you're not "adding a phenomenon to itself."
Yet a thing and itself is the same as addition.
This is simply you not understanding normal language usage.
"And" is addition...there is nothing else to understand.
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 10:56 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Proof of Nothing
Replies: 21
Views: 210

Re: Proof of Nothing

Even the term axiomatic must be taken axiomatically thus resulting in a circle. All axioms are cyclical by nature and as cyclical are empty in themselves. Fine, if that's what you believe. But why bother with them at all? Just anything can be an, "axiom." Why not, "assume," philosophy is actually a...
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 10:55 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: P = -P
Replies: 56
Views: 1494

Re: P = -P

So you're not adding a "phenomenon" to itself? Adding one phenomenon to itself shows multiple distinct phenomena thus to say adding it to itself is a contradiction. So when you're doing addition, you're not "adding a phenomenon to itself." Yet a thing and itself is the same as addition.
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 9:23 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion
Replies: 39
Views: 385

Re: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion

nothing, this post is for you. It’s just one more attempt to help you understand what nearly everyone else understands. If "nearly everyone" understood the difference between knowledge and belief, the "believer vs. unbeliever" division could/would not exist. This division exists precisely because "...
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 9:19 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion
Replies: 39
Views: 385

Re: Evil as Belief-Based Inversion

(Propositional) knowledge being justified true belief is a standard philosophical view going all the way back to Plato at least. So there's nothing "new age" about it. It's a view that goes back almost 2500 years, and that has persisted until the present. In fact, it's one of the least controversia...
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 9:17 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Proof of Nothing
Replies: 21
Views: 210

Re: Proof of Nothing

An axiom is not an assumption. An axiom is an axiom because to deny it is a self-contradiction. One must assume the axiom is true in order to formulate a denial of the axiom. For example. The fact of existence is axiomatic. "There is existence." One cannot deny existence without assuming the existe...
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 9:14 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: 2=1!
Replies: 13
Views: 500

Re: 2=1!

I am puzzled by this: (1/x)*x=1 for all values of x including when x=0 . This means that we can set x=0 in the equation which we get (infinity)*0=1. In the same manner, we can write (1/x)*2*x=2. But the left-hand side of the equation can be written as (1/x)*(x+x)=2. Now let's set x equal to zero no...
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 9:10 pm
Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
Topic: 2=1!
Replies: 13
Views: 500

Re: 2=1!

I think we should define different zero as we define different infinity. The problem solved. The problem one will encounter if/when doing this is they will no longer be describing anything in the real, physical universe. That is fine if the purposes for doing the same are for another system, but it...
by Eodnhoj7
Mon May 03, 2021 8:54 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Proof of Nothing
Replies: 21
Views: 210

Re: Proof of Nothing

To prove nothing is to prove nothing at all thus no proof exists. The absence of proof for nothing is necessitated by the nature of nothing at including proof as fundamentally nothing. Considering there is no proof for "nothing" nothing cannot be disproven either given an absence of proof for nothi...