Thanks for the links, but I studied computer science for years.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 25, 2018 7:37 pm How was the logic formed from which computer enabled themselves? As to the 1's and 0's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_code
http://www.commens.org/encyclopedia/art ... adic-logic
"computers enabled themselves" Loooool
Yes 0s and 1s float in the air, and they fly into the computers so they can enable themselves.
Hehe, you guessed correctly about me! Once that is, which is about 14% of the time. You have amazing psychological reading skills.Somehow I doubt, you have had any form of physical altercation or struggle...otherwise you would not only observe the necessity of "mind over matter", but quite frankly be thankful for the concept. I am guessing...early twenties, difficulty in college, couldn't get the girl, piss poor family (treated eachother poorly, not in the financial sense), and the general young male angry, because everything around him threatens his identity....is that a true guess?
The one thing I love, not like about philosophy, is that it has no real limits...I can address a concept...or the person directly. There are so many philosophical schools which justify each side.
But this is an internet forum dedicated, quite literally, to debating. If this is not real, then why are you here? Since when was a debate not a form of intellectual athleticism? How is this no different than intellectual exercise?
Ok so you admitted that you are weak, you hid in your head in your mental ivory tower. The problem is, you see, that there is no mind-matter dualism. So you are simply delusional, and your maths is also based on this delusion system.
These statements show again, that you don't have any grasp what abstractions are.According to you it does not really exist, so in effect by your own definition if you understand it you understand nothing.
No, you just don't understand how human thinking works. At all. And your maths is based on it. Which is why you won't be the next Euler, sorry.Observing your conclusions contradicting your premises...yes I am observing self-refuting nonsensical circular reasoning.