Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6208
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Logik wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 6:12 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:32 pm False, up is dependent upon context. Expanding context is just a new context.

The bowling ball is falling away from the sky when viewing the context of it from outside the plane. From inside the plane the ball is moving up. Context.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

You can't decide whether to accept or reject computation, can you?

From the Chomsky hierarchy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context-free_grammar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context-sensitive_grammar
False, computation works...it is just not the logical be all and end all. When it is reduced to the logical be all and end all, it results in a self contradictory state.

That is the clearest stance I can provide.

Why are you always reducing everything to false dichotomies?
Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Logik »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 6:12 pm When it is reduced to the logical be all and end all, it results in a self contradictory state.
How is that possible when I demonstrated contradictions don't exist.

You must be making stuff up surely.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6208
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Logik wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 6:44 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 6:12 pm When it is reduced to the logical be all and end all, it results in a self contradictory state.
How is that possible when I demonstrated contradictions don't exist.

You must be making stuff up surely.
False, all variables which are applied in lambda are connected by default to a quantity or set of quantities.

All variables are connected in (Lx.M), with "L" taking the place of the lamba symbol because I am too lazy to copy and paste, where the variable is connected to the abstraction.

(M N) as application observes all abstractions (proofs) as connected to the application (function).
Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Logik »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 10:21 pm False, all variables which are applied in lambda are connected by default to a quantity or set of quantities.
False. There are no quantities in a Turing machine. Only symbols. What do symbols mean?

Nothing and everything.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 10:21 pm All variables are connected in (Lx.M), with "L" taking the place of the lamba symbol because I am too lazy to copy and paste, where the variable is connected to the abstraction.

(M N) as application observes all abstractions (proofs) as connected to the application (function).
You take too much for granted. Lambda calculus is search&replace - symbol manipulation!

If you want "variables" - you have to invent them (assignment operator)
If you want "quantities" - you have to invent them (arithmetic)
If you want "abstractions" - you have to invent them (functions, types, classes).

A Turing machine starts with symbols that mean nothing: ⊙
You get to define their meaning.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6208
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Logik wrote: Mon Mar 11, 2019 4:52 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 10:21 pm False, all variables which are applied in lambda are connected by default to a quantity or set of quantities.
False. There are no quantities in a Turing machine. Only symbols. What do symbols mean?

Nothing and everything.

So you can program a turing machine without using basic binary code..."quantities"?



Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2019 10:21 pm All variables are connected in (Lx.M), with "L" taking the place of the lamba symbol because I am too lazy to copy and paste, where the variable is connected to the abstraction.

(M N) as application observes all abstractions (proofs) as connected to the application (function).
You take too much for granted. Lambda calculus is search&replace - symbol manipulation!

If you want "variables" - you have to invent them (assignment operator)
If you want "quantities" - you have to invent them (arithmetic)
If you want "abstractions" - you have to invent them (functions, types, classes).

A Turing machine starts with symbols that mean nothing: ⊙
You get to define their meaning.

I don't need a machine to define their meaning...machines are just for lazy people who are not will to think. Haha, regardless of the validity of that point, what you fail to observe is that lambda calc. effectively connects one invention to another...you cannot claim the absence of "connection" (ie seperation) you argued prior.

Your logic fails.

Contradictions exists as incompleteness.
Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Logik »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:23 pm Contradictions exists as incompleteness.
Yes it does.

But the process of processing contradictions (identifying them, analysing them, learning from them, updating the system) exists in completeness.

It's called learning.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4217
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by surreptitious57 »

More knowledge does not automatically lead to greater understanding though over time it will
This is because it does not travel in perfect linear formation but is sometimes more convoluted
Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Logik »

surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:17 am More knowledge does not automatically lead to greater understanding though over time it will
This is because it does not travel in perfect linear formation but is sometimes more convoluted
That you draw a distinction between knowledge and understanding is obvious.

Whether you draw the same distinction as I do ... that will take time to unpack. And I don't think it's necessary.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4217
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by surreptitious57 »

Absolute knowledge that is arrived at through falsification is not a problem
But what is a problem is provisional knowledge arrived at through induction
This knowledge may not be wrong but it will however always be incomplete
Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Logik »

surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:34 am Absolute knowledge that is arrived at through falsification is not a problem
But what is a problem is provisional knowledge arrived at through induction
This knowledge may not be wrong but it will however always be incomplete
All knowledge we possess is arrived at through induction.

Axiomatic truths are conceptual only. 1 = 1 ;)
surreptitious57
Posts: 4217
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by surreptitious57 »

Logic wrote:
All knowledge we possess is arrived at through induction
What about knowledge arrived at through falsification ?
For is it not essentially the same as absolute knowledge ?

One black swan is proof that not all swans are white
And it would be absolute not provisional knowledge
Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Logik »

surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:58 am What about knowledge arrived at through falsification ?
For is it not essentially the same as absolute knowledge ?
Even falsification is contextual. Something that doesn't work in context A may work in context B.

This is known as the Ludic fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludic_fallacy

The error of confusing theory with practice.

This also reminds me of a similar sentiment in military history where the French (considered masters of fencing) kept losing fencing duels to English officers. The French fenced by some set of "rules" - the English fought to win at all cost.

Or as Game of Thrones conveyed the lesson: "You do not fight with honour!"
"No, but the dead guy did."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2Yy0pkcfiA


surreptitious57 wrote: Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:58 am One black swan is proof that not all swans are white
And it would be absolute not provisional knowledge
Well, is it? Telling me that not all swans are white doesn't tell me anything about swans.
Telling me that some swans are black and some swans are white is incomplete.
Some swans may be brown.
Some swans may be pink.
Some swans may be maroon.

All swans are NOT white is useless because some swans ARE white and some swans aren't.

This leads to another definition: I don't know what knowledge is, but I know what knowledge isn't. Knowledge isn't useless.

And telling me "all swans are NOT white" is completely and utterly useless!

You can blame it on JTB (Justified True Belief). According to JTB this is knowledge: Tomorrow I may or may not die.

If that's knowledge, I will gladly trade it for toilet paper.
User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 976
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Speakpigeon »

I know I'm in pain whenever I'm in pain without having to do anything. Somehow my brain and my body do all the hard work. I don't have to do anything. I also don't remember having to do any work for learning French, my mother tongue.
EB
Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Logik »

Speakpigeon wrote: Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:42 pm I know I'm in pain whenever I'm in pain without having to do anything. Somehow my brain and my body do all the hard work. I don't have to do anything. I also don't remember having to do any work for learning French, my mother tongue.
EB
Too bad you can't tell the difference between acute pain, chronic pain, bone pain, soft tissue pain, muscle pain, nerve pain, referred pain, phantom pain (and all the other pain-categories that I am leaving out).

Because if you did know the difference, you would be closer to establishing a hypothesis as to what you NEED TO DO next to make the pain stop.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6208
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Further demonstration the law of identity is broken (Sophists welcome)

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Logik wrote: Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:10 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:23 pm Contradictions exists as incompleteness.
Yes it does.

But the process of processing contradictions (identifying them, analysing them, learning from them, updating the system) exists in completeness.

It's called learning.
So is that your goal, to provide a language game? "X" means "Y"...and you are trying to kill philosophy? Good luck.
Post Reply