Philosophy Now Forum

Philosophy Explorer wrote: Do you count, e.g., the criminally insane as belonging to general society?
PhilX

Why not, many of them are our elected leaders.

"This article is available to subscribers only."

I have let go of my attachment to reading it.

The Tao you can subscribe to is not the true Tao. Or so I've heard.

if there was a difference a couple of thousand years ago, there isn't today. And an axiom is no longer something that we see is true by observation. Rather, it's a statement accepted without proof in order to get a particular deductive system off the ground. The standard axiomatic system for all mat...

It occurs to me that I owe a much more clear explanation of the chain of cardinal arithmetic showing that the set of curves in the plane has the same cardinality as the real numbers. I shall do this now. There are three things we need to know. 1) If X and Y are sets, the set of functions from Y to X...

This is my second in a series of posts reviving @PhilX's old posts on infinity in order to clarify some issues of philosophical interest and importance. The first thread in this series is http://forum.philosophynow.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=15446, and it wouldn't hurt to read that one first if yo...

Here's the proof that the difference of anagrams is divisible by 9. First, note that x = x0 + x1 * 10 + x2 * 10^2 + ... + xn * 10^n (writing xn or sometimes x_n to mean "x_subscript_n") and likewise y = y0 + y1 * 10 + y2 * 10^2 + ... + yn * 10^n. Note that since the x_i's are just a rearra...

@PhilX, I resurrected this months-old thread because you have a lot of similar questions about transfinite cardinals in this and other threads and I wanted to unpack some of these issues if you're still interested. The question of whether every infinite set is cardinally equivalent to an Aleph is ac...

A quick Google search will show that this author is a well-known crank. Regarding calculus, he clearly has never seen the proper formalization of the concept of a limit. He has an Amazon book if anyone wants to send him money.

a) Case of a physical disk. You can't precisely find or define the center to arbitrary precision because of measurement error. And any physical rotational mechanism is imperfect and has some amount of wobble. So there is no stationary point in a physical spinning disk. b) Case of a mathematical disk...