Philosophy Now Forum

If Mind is another word for God then I dont accept it because I dont believe in God This doesn't make sense to me. You believe in Minds. You do not believe in God. If Mind is another word for God then what you are saying is "I believe in Mind but I do not believe in Mind". If two words ar...

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 7:59 pm Could it be robbery? or even murder? rape? But the most selfish act doesn’t have to be a crime, just so long as it is the negation of altruism.

Altruism is selfish. Yay dopamine!

The assumptive nature of axioms is "universal" and as such all laws of identity are grounded in the properties of the "axiom" as fundamentally being an identity property in and of itself. All laws are axioms, all axioms are identity properties. Empirically - this is nonsense. If...

I think that most people would agree that person Y would be a liar for directly contradicting mutually agreed upon conventions. I think most logicians would agree that this is a bandwagon fallacy. If person Y could come up with some set of axioms such as PA that make their stipulation coherent (suc...

I cannot explain the key point of how I converted formal proofs of symbolic logic to conform to the sound deductive inference model to people that don't know symbolic logic. But you can explain it to yourself, can you not? And you understand symbolic logic. So... go ahead and provide the deductive ...

PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2019 8:40 pm This is becoming pointless.

Is that your way of saying that you can't express your own sound, deductive reasoning, despite having a complete, consistent and decidable logic-system at your disposal?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2019 8:29 pm A thing cannot "cause" itself. The universe is a contingent entity, which necessitates that it has had a beginning. Thus, the universe is an effect.

What evidence led you assert that the universe is contingent?

Prolog already exists and because It implements the sound deductive inference model Prolog <IS> the algorithm. No. Prolog is a system, not an algorithm. I am asking you to show us the deductive steps through which you deduced that I am using the the wrong meaning of "synthetic". I ONLY ha...

The inherent design of Prolog already provides the sound deductive inference model and the sound deductive inference model already refutes Tarski and Gödel. All that I have to actually produce is the explanation of why this is true. Everything else is already done. If everything else is already don...

There are millions of lines that support those functions. The exact same thing can be explained in terms of a Prolog query. A Prolog query returns: "Yes" for True and "Yes" for the negation of the query for False. Everything else is unsound. Very well, so you will be prodicing t...

Axiom(0) Stipulates** this definition of Axiom: Expressions of language defined to have the semantic value of Boolean True. Provides the symbolic logic equivalent of true premises. Stipulating** this specification of True and False: (TRUE ↔ ⊤ ∧ FALSE ↔ ⊥) Axiom(1) ∀F ∈ Formal_System ∀x ∈ Closed_WFF...

You are using the wrong meaning of synthetic. You are not using the one from philosophy. The one from philosophy corresponds to Kant's a posteriori. You are using the wrong meaning of "wrong". You are not using the one from Logik's philosophy. The one from Logik's philosophy corresponds t...

You can show how the sound deductive logical inference model is either incomplete or inconsistent? "incompleteness" and "inconsistency" are synthetic notions. Formalize them. Synthetic "truth" is off topic: The ONLY thing that we can know for certain about reality is t...

We don't even have to believe in a god in order to know for certain there was a First Cause. Causality implies it necessarily. Causality implies a temporal dualism: Cause-and-Effect. How can you tell whether the Universe is the cause or the effect? There is absolutely no law of physics that mandate...

I think that artificial intelligence is a substitute for intelligence. That's it. It doesn't modify intelligence. It replaces intelligence. Yep. That sums it up in a way. For certain kind of problems AI is a cheaper alternative to bio intelligence. If you can use my position to discuss value, do so...