Visual demonstration of infentisimals

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Visual demonstration of infentisimals

Post by Skepdick »

RCSaunders wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:50 pm I have no idea why you are confused.
Because you weren't explicit in pointing out HOW truth is distinguished from falsity.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:50 pm Whether or not a statement identifying that color is true, or not, is determined by the actual color transmitted, reflected, or emitted being correctly identified by the color concept. If the actual color is blue, only a statement, "that color is blue," would be true, while any proposition that asserted, "that color is ... [any other color except blue] would not be true.
I have no idea why YOU are confused - I have given you FOUR possible truth-candidates.

Identify the one which is best identified by the truth concept.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:50 pm Your examples are meaningless, unless your are intentionally evading the truth.
I am not! I have given you FOUR truth-candidates. And I am asking you to identify the correct one.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:50 pm I have no idea what concept you use to identify any specific color
And I have no idea what oncept you use to identify truth.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:50 pm you either use the same concept to identify different colors (as you did in your first example) which makes your concepts useless, or have no specific concepts to identify any colors.
So you either use the same concept to identify truth, or you have no specific concept of truth.
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:50 pm I have no idea what the point of your second set of examples is. If you are referring to the colors of the fonts used to print those sentences, your identification of the colors is both unique and useless.
The point is to give you FOUR truth-candidates so that you can identify the truly true truth.

Why can't you fucking tell us HOW to identify it?
RCSaunders wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 10:50 pm Unless you suffer from some form of color blindness, I doubt you would try to explain to the judge, the red light you failed to stop for was really blue. You know you would not get away with it. Why are you trying to get away with it here?
What the fuck does this have to do with anything?

I know that I should stop on this color. I know that I should go on this color. That's what I do. Irrespective of what I call them.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Visual demonstration of infentisimals

Post by RCSaunders »

Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 11:13 pm I know that I should stop on this color.
"This color," is as good as any other word (symbol) for the concept. The words, "red, scarlet, 'this color,' crimson" only represent the concept. It's the relationship between the concepts words are only symbols for, that represent the concepts, that propostions express the relationship between. The proposition, "the light is red," does not say the word, "light," is the word, "red." It is an actual source of illumination the word light refers to that is be declared has the color attribute of what you chose to call, "this color," but could equally be symbolized by the words "red," or, "crimson," or, "scarlet."
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Visual demonstration of infentisimals

Post by Skepdick »

RCSaunders wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 2:28 am
Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 11:13 pm I know that I should stop on this color.
"This color," is as good as any other word (symbol) for the concept. The words, "red, scarlet, 'this color,' crimson" only represent the concept. It's the relationship between the concepts words are only symbols for, that represent the concepts, that propostions express the relationship between. The proposition, "the light is red," does not say the word, "light," is the word, "red." It is an actual source of illumination the word light refers to that is be declared has the color attribute of what you chose to call, "this color," but could equally be symbolized by the words "red," or, "crimson," or, "scarlet."
You seem incredibly fucking confused.

In the article YOU linked this sentence can be found
Truth is not something established by consensus, popular opinion, peer review, or polls. Truth is determine by only one thing, reality itself, and is identified by discovering what that reality is. There is no other kind of truth.
Why have you shifted all the focus of the discussion on me and my concepts?

The English sentences below are self-contained. They make objective claims about their own properties.

If rality itself determines truth, then the truth or falsity of these sentences can be determined by reality alone.

Let reality decide which one is true - I don't want to be part of this.

It is true that it is incorrect to describe this color as "red".
It is true that it is correct to describe this color as "red".
It is true that it is incorrect to describe this color as "red".
It is true that It is correct to describe this color as "red".
Age
Posts: 20205
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Visual demonstration of infentisimals

Post by Age »

Skepdick wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:04 am
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 2:28 am
Skepdick wrote: Sat Feb 12, 2022 11:13 pm I know that I should stop on this color.
"This color," is as good as any other word (symbol) for the concept. The words, "red, scarlet, 'this color,' crimson" only represent the concept. It's the relationship between the concepts words are only symbols for, that represent the concepts, that propostions express the relationship between. The proposition, "the light is red," does not say the word, "light," is the word, "red." It is an actual source of illumination the word light refers to that is be declared has the color attribute of what you chose to call, "this color," but could equally be symbolized by the words "red," or, "crimson," or, "scarlet."
You seem incredibly fucking confused.

In the article YOU linked this sentence can be found
Truth is not something established by consensus, popular opinion, peer review, or polls. Truth is determine by only one thing, reality itself, and is identified by discovering what that reality is. There is no other kind of truth.
Why have you shifted all the focus of the discussion on me and my concepts?

The English sentences below are self-contained. They make objective claims about their own properties.

If rality itself determines truth, then the truth or falsity of these sentences can be determined by reality alone.

Let reality decide which one is true - I don't want to be part of this.

It is true that it is incorrect to describe this color as "red".
It is true that it is correct to describe this color as "red".
It is true that it is incorrect to describe this color as "red".
It is true that It is correct to describe this color as "red".
And, as can be CLEARLY SEEN here by these examples 'truth' is DECIDED by 'consensus', or 'agreement' AND 'acceptance', and NOT by absolutely ANY thing else.

And, what thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth IS, EXACTLY, is just 'that' what could be AGREED WITH and ACCEPTED by ALL, or, in other words, just DECIDED by ALL.

SEE, if 'truth' is determined by 'reality', itself, then the next conundrum 'you', human beings, will have is in DECIDING; What is 'reality', itself, EXACTLY? And, what will be CLEARLY SEEN and RECOGNIZED IS, even what 'reality', itself, is, EXACTLY, is again DECIDED by 'you', human beings.

So, AGAIN, only what could be IN AGREEMENT and ACCEPTED by ALL IS what is REAL, and which is what thee ACTUAL Truth of 'things' IRREFUTABLY IS.

As I have been SAYING, SHOWING, and POINTING OUT, from the outset.

In your four examples what is correct or incorrect is just 'that' what is IN AGREEMENT and ACCEPTED by 'you', human beings.

The color of the first two sentences is NEITHER true NOR false in relation to absolutely ANY thing other than what 'you', individually or collectively, AGREE and ACCEPT. So, whatever 'color' 'you' WANT, or DECIDE, to 'agree' and 'accept' that 'that' color is, then that IS what 'it' IS, EXACTLY.

NO 'color' is 'what it is' because of ANY outside of human thought influence. EVERY 'color' is 'what it is' BECAUSE 'you' have just been TAUGHT to 'agree' and 'accept' that 'that is' what 'that' 'color' IS.
Post Reply