The Questions of Equivocation

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9561
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Harbal »

Walker wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:25 pm
Soccer, aka football. Final score: 1-0. It was a very exciting match. :roll:
viewtopic.php?p=589326#p589326
And you, presumably, think the game would be more exciting if it were made easier to get the ball in the net.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Walker »

According to The Simpsons, soccer causes so much frustration in the fans, that they riot. Low scoring matches would cause such barbaric behavior as a secondary cause that awakens and gives life to the primary, inherent cause that otherwise would lie dormant as a potentiality for war. It's why they say modern man needs a vicarious, virtual outlet for war such as rioting in frustration at a soccer match.

Golf? It's a far more cerebral game, about 90% mind and 10% ability. 11% in Tiger's case.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9561
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Harbal »

Walker wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:48 pm
Golf? It's a far more cerebral game, about 90% mind and 10% ability. 11% in Tiger's case.
Trying to get a ball in a hole, with nobody trying to prevent you from doing it, can't be very mentally demanding, I'm sure.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Walker »

The physics of the world and the body join as one to make intent, reality. In other words, to create what is imagined. Jack Nicklaus made pre-visioning the flight of the ball before the physical act, de rigueur.

So, just imagine. The green is 200 yards away. You can see the flag from where you are, and it's blowing left to right. Between you and the green is big tree and it's too close for a long shot. You could get over it with a lofted club but that wouldn't take you far enough. So, you must hit a curving shot around the tree, a shot that curves from right to left and that's called a draw, in this case into the wind because the wind will check too much of a curve. The mind draws a line around the tree for the ball to follow. Before you hit the shot you stand behind the ball and see the line of flight, before the flight. You empty the clutter and fix that in your mind. Then you address the ball, which means to ground the club behind the ball except when you're in a sand trap, then the club can't touch the ground. You see the ball, and the see the flight of the ball at the same time, while addressing the ball, before the ball strike. When you hit the ball and the ball follows the exact line that you envisioned, curving around the tree hard and then high into the wind which checks up the flight and the curve, but you don't see it land because of the lay of the land, then you get into your little electric cart and sip your beverage while driving up to the green and chatting about the finer points with your golf partner, only to see that your next shot will be a makeable putt. You then realize that you have created the exact reality that you envisioned. Such precision from 200 yards (meters) requires the mental joining of present to future, to create now. (Cue mysterious Twilight Zone theme).

It's an affirmation of the continuity one is living. A self-check, a self-test if you will. Man against the elements. Executives are drawn to the game because they too create reality, the reality of life and the game.

Soccer looks like a kid's game.
Last edited by Walker on Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8533
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Sculptor »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 12:52 am Two mammals share the same nature of mammal thus the two are connected as one through their relationship, their relationship is "mammal".

Equality is a relationship as it is a connection and if phenomena relate then they equivocate.

This is tied to my second point, which is best phrased through questions:

Where does total equality exist?

If total equality does not exist then is it not possible anything can equate if a similarity occurs?
Your level of confusion is astonishing.
Please loo up Equivocation..
DEFINITION:
use ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself.
Last edited by Sculptor on Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8533
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Sculptor »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 12:52 am Two mammals share the same nature of mammal thus the two are connected as one through their relationship, their relationship is "mammal".

Equality is a relationship as it is a connection and if phenomena relate then they equivocate.

This is tied to my second point, which is best phrased through questions:

Where does total equality exist?

If total equality does not exist then is it not possible anything can equate if a similarity occurs?
The two mammals only relate via an external observer; the human who is interested enough to define them both through criteria he finds important.
There is no equivocation since you do not know the meaning of the word.

To answer your question - which is unrelated to the example - no where, since "total" equality is an oxymoron, there is only one totality.

Equality can exist in parts defined by specific limiting characteristics.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9561
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Harbal »

Walker wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:29 pm

It's an affirmation of the continuity one is living. A self-check, a self-test if you will. Man against the elements. Executives are drawn to the game because they too create reality, the reality of life and the game.
If that is how you see a few guys on a very big lawn whacking little white balls about until they can get them to drop into little holes in the ground, then I can only commend you on your incredible imagination.
Walker wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:29 pm Soccer looks like a kid's game.
I never really thought about it. I don't watch it myself.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Walker »

Harbal wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:56 pm
If that is how you see a few guys on a very big lawn whacking little white balls about until they can get them to drop into little holes in the ground, then I can only commend you on your incredible imagination.
If you would try to make the described shot, you couldn't do it at first. But if you were curious enough to persist in trying to make the shot you have seen others make, then when you do learn to do it, you will understand the thrill when the imagining becomes real, when the inner becomes the outer, and you will move beyond Speculative Philosophy.

What seems incredible from the outside looking in, is merely a reporting of the way things are.

It's merely an explanation of golf's popularity. Funny how folks claim ignorance, and yet cling to ignorance. It's likely because good-hearted folks who know the answer to expressed ignorance, interpret expressed ignorance as an implicit request for clarification. However, it could very well be that the one expressing ignorance is fulfilling some other need than to end the ignorance, which would account for prolonging ignorance.

The need could be as trite as trying to look cute. It could also be a need to elicit more to bounce off of. (How could that be worded without ending on a preposition?)
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Walker »

Since this is the math thread, the relevance of the golf reference can be found in imagining the thrill when the first moon trip made real the imaginings of math.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Age »

Harbal wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:50 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 12:52 am Where does total equality exist?
I suppose notional equality can exist, but absolute equality cannot. No two things can ever be the same thing, no matter how similar they are.
Is every physical thing made up of matter?

If yes, then could this be an absolute equality?
Harbal wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:50 pm As far as arbitrary equaliy is concerned, where we might say two things are equal in a certain respect, we simply decide for ourselves what qualifying conditions must be met in order to arrive at that conclusion.
Could 'inequality' also be decided upon qualifying conditions, also in a certain respect?
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9561
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 3:56 am
Harbal wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:50 pm
I suppose notional equality can exist, but absolute equality cannot. No two things can ever be the same thing, no matter how similar they are.
Is every physical thing made up of matter?
My understanding of the word physical includes that it must consist of matter.
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 3:56 am If yes, then could this be an absolute equality?
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question.
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 3:56 am Could 'inequality' also be decided upon qualifying conditions, also in a certain respect?
I would think that any search for equality would, at the same time, also reveal inequality. But I might have misunderstood the question.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Age »

Harbal wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 8:15 am
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 3:56 am
Harbal wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:50 pm
I suppose notional equality can exist, but absolute equality cannot. No two things can ever be the same thing, no matter how similar they are.
Is every physical thing made up of matter?
My understanding of the word physical includes that it must consist of matter.
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 3:56 am If yes, then could this be an absolute equality?
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question.
If, as some people claim, everything is physical, then it could be argued that there is equality among all things. That is; they are all made up of, or consist of, matter. Thus, it could be concluded an 'absolute equality', in a sense.
Harbal wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 8:15 am
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 3:56 am Could 'inequality' also be decided upon qualifying conditions, also in a certain respect?
I would think that any search for equality would, at the same time, also reveal inequality. But I might have misunderstood the question.
I think you have.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9561
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 1:04 pm

If, as some people claim, everything is physical, then it could be argued that there is equality among all things. That is; they are all made up of, or consist of, matter. Thus, it could be concluded an 'absolute equality', in a sense.
"In a sense" is the key phrase. The word equality doesn't mean much without being qualified. Equality implies similarity, so you need to first specify in what way, and to what extent, two or more things need to be similar to each other in order to be considered equal. I don't know if "equality" has a precise meaning in pholosophy, but in ordinary language its meaning is arbitrary, and depends on what the user of the word means by it.
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 1:04 pm
I think you have.
Yes, I thought I must have.
Age
Posts: 20194
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Age »

Harbal wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:42 pm
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 1:04 pm

If, as some people claim, everything is physical, then it could be argued that there is equality among all things. That is; they are all made up of, or consist of, matter. Thus, it could be concluded an 'absolute equality', in a sense.
"In a sense" is the key phrase. The word equality doesn't mean much without being qualified.
Very, very True.
Harbal wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:42 pm Equality implies similarity, so you need to first specify in what way, and to what extent, two or more things need to be similar to each other in order to be considered equal.
Again, very, very True, and agreed with, from my perspective.
Harbal wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:42 pm I don't know if "equality" has a precise meaning in pholosophy, but in ordinary language its meaning is arbitrary, and depends on what the user of the word means by it.
Even the word 'philosophy' has different meanings, which can be arbitrary, and depends on what the user of the word means by it.

See, to me, the word 'equality' could never have a precise meaning 'in philosophy', because of what the word 'philosophy' precisely means, to me.
Harbal wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:42 pm
Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 1:04 pm
I think you have.
Yes, I thought I must have.
So, we both in agreement, once again.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9561
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The Questions of Equivocation

Post by Harbal »

Age wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:57 pm See, to me, the word 'equality' could never have a precise meaning 'in philosophy', because of what the word 'philosophy' precisely means, to me.
That can be the case with so many words. No matter how precise you try to be with your wording, and phrasing, there comes a point where all you can do is just hope that those you are trying to communicate with will know what you mean.
Post Reply