Individualism vs. Collectivism

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9192
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:13 pm It is not ad-hominem when it's a fact.
Well, that is false, actually.

The ad hominem fallacy does not rely on truth or falsehood of the accusation. If you believed me, and based that belief on some claim of my personal wonderfulness, you would be just as ad hominem fallacious in that as you would be if you disbelieved me by reason of insult. The ad hominem is a fallacious form of reasoning, not merely an erroneous content.

On the other point, check my critique with a mathematician. I've already run it by one of the world experts in this area, so you're welcome to try. See if infinite recursions can increase probabilities if infinite variables are engaged at the same time, and the whole thing is under totally random conditions.

Good luck. :wink:
Skepdick
Posts: 5121
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:20 pm
Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:13 pm It is not ad-hominem when it's a fact.
Well, that is false, actually.

The ad hominem fallacy does not rely on truth or falsehood of the accusation. If you believed me, and based that belief on some claim of my personal wonderfulness, you would be just as ad hominem fallacious in that as you would be if you disbelieved me by reason of insult. The ad hominem is a fallacious form of reasoning, not merely an erroneous content.

On the other point, check my critique with a mathematician. I've already run it by one of the world experts in this area, so you're welcome to try. See if infinite recursions can increase probabilities if infinite variables are engaged at the same time, and the whole thing is under totally random conditions.

Good luck. :wink:
But the accusation is not an assault of your character.

By calling you stupid I am actually pointing your factual inability for Mathematical or Statistical reasoning.

I have checked your argument with a Mathematician. I am a Mathematician.
Last edited by Skepdick on Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9192
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:18 pm ...the probability of our existence is not disputed. As observed - it's 100% certain that we exist.
You're only assuming, though, that the reason for our existence is randomness plus infinity. Not only have you not demonstrated that it is, you are in fact wrong about the possibility that randomness plus infinity can account for ANY singular outcome. There is, in fact, no reason why any outcome is necessary at all. Randomness plus infinity, as I have argued, will NEVER account for the observable fact that we are here. So the fact that we are here counts, if anything, against such an attempt to explain.

What you need, then, is a better kind of explanation. Randomness plus infinity will not do.
Skepdick
Posts: 5121
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:24 pm You're only assuming, though, that the reason for our existence is randomness plus infinity.
I am not assuming anything. I am just counting.

The probability of us being alive is 100%. Irrespective of the odds.
Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:24 pm What you need, then, is a better kind of explanation. Randomness plus infinity will not do.
No you don't. It is Mathematically sufficient. And you are the one who appealed to Mathematics.

I guess it backfired, huh?
Last edited by Skepdick on Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:27 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Nick_A
Posts: 5215
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Nick_A »

I C
There are two obvious observations that destroy this theory. One is that the universe is expanding, not contracting; and as the red-shift effect shows, accelerating, not slowing. The second is this: that no known or detectable force in the universe is anywhere close to strong enough to induce a cosmic collapse. Matter, as it expands, has now exceeded escape velocity and cannot be "crunched" anymore. We are headed toward the state known as heat-death, and not cosmic recycling: that much is quite clear.
The matter which comprises our universse is of different densities. The expanding universe is making more dense matter while the material density of the Source is undetectable. For this reason I believe Simone Weil wrote:
For her part, Simone Weil, in one of her last essays, wrote:
"Toujours le même infiniment petit, qui est infiniment plus que tout." [72]
[Always the same infinitely small, which is infinitely more than all.]


The ONE in relation to the density of consciousness is infinitely small but is greater than all we experience in the relative densities of matter.

In the East the great cycle is called the Breath of Brahma. Exhaltion is creation while inhalation is the evolutionary return to the Source.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9192
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:22 pm But the accusation is not an assault of your character.
It does not matter. It's not relevant to the question, whether you intended it as insult or not.
By calling you stupid I am actually pointing your factual inability for Mathematical or Statistical reasoning.
"Stupid" means "in a stupor." Not only is it something you could not possibly know, it would have nothing at all to do with whether I, in my "stupor" accidentally spoke the truth or a lie. And that's the real point: either way, it's irrelevant.
I am a Mathematician.
May I make a recommendation, then? You'll find the work of David Hilbert interesting in this area. As a mathematician, you should enjoy his discussions of infinity.

But let us leave it there. I think we've both said what we think. I don't want to fall to insults over it.
Skepdick
Posts: 5121
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:28 pm
Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:22 pm But the accusation is not an assault of your character.
It does not matter. It's not relevant to the question, whether you intended it as insult or not.
By calling you stupid I am actually pointing your factual inability for Mathematical or Statistical reasoning.
"Stupid" means "in a stupor." Not only is it something you could not possibly know, it would have nothing at all to do with whether I, in my "stupor" accidentally spoke the truth or a lie. And that's the real point: either way, it's irrelevant.
I am a Mathematician.
May I make a recommendation, then? You'll find the work of David Hilbert interesting in this area. As a mathematician, you should enjoy his discussions of infinity.

But let us leave it there. I think we've both said what we think. I don't want to fall to insults over it.
But you are factually Statistically incompetent.

This is not an insult. This is you losing the Mathematical argument.

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/stupid
1. Having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.
1.1 Dazed and unable to think clearly.

You are stupid.
Last edited by Skepdick on Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9192
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Nick_A wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:26 pm The ONE in relation to the density of consciousness is infinitely small but is greater than all we experience in the relative densities of matter.
Yeah, well, that's not science or theology, Nick. It's just poetry.
In the East the great cycle is called the Breath of Brahma. Exhaltion is creation while inhalation is the evolutionary return to the Source.
Yeah, I'm not a Buddhist, and I think in this regard they're manifestly wrong. They have the right to be wrong, though, if they want to be. I'm not contesting that.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9192
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:29 pm This is you losing the Mathematical argument.
Let's see if that turns out to be true.
Skepdick
Posts: 5121
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:32 pm
Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:29 pm This is you losing the Mathematical argument.
Let's see if that turns out to be true.
You can't even tell that you are wrong? Only more evidence that you are statistically incompetent.

You must be able to count your hits AND your misses in order to do stats.
If you can't even recognise your misses, how are you going to count them?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Skepdick wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 6:14 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 6:06 pm The experiment of particles spontaneously popping in and out of a void correlates with this.

However it does not necessitate an absense of causality. The alternation of the particles in and out of space, as well as the projective nature of the particles (a moving to b moving to c) still allows for causality.

Causality can be spontaneous and randomn and still necessitate order.
Order in respect to what? How you conceptualise/define "order" becomes the way you interpret its meaning.

Yes, thus we are left with the forms of the trillema as the foundations for order.
It is expansive (trillema exists through multiple phenomena) and circular.


You have to synthesize some metric for "universal time" if you want to rescue causality. https://www.quantamagazine.org/quantum- ... -20161201/

Algebraic expression for time thread. Standard projection of one point to another.
As in time is a progression of points, Heidegger covers this in part. All time is thus grounded in the contents of recursion and isomorphism (one to many and many to one).


In computer science this is the distinction between system time and process time.
Nick_A
Posts: 5215
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Nick_A »

skepdick wrote

You are stupid.

Perfect! I'm going to suggest that this become the new heading for Philosophy Forum and invite people to get real and make philosophy worthy of its name
Nick_A
Posts: 5215
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Nick_A »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:31 pm
Nick_A wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:26 pm The ONE in relation to the density of consciousness is infinitely small but is greater than all we experience in the relative densities of matter.
Yeah, well, that's not science or theology, Nick. It's just poetry.
In the East the great cycle is called the Breath of Brahma. Exhaltion is creation while inhalation is the evolutionary return to the Source.
Yeah, I'm not a Buddhist, and I think in this regard they're manifestly wrong. They have the right to be wrong, though, if they want to be. I'm not contesting that.
I see you are not familiar with the laws of vibration and as material vibrations increase matter becomes less dense and people begin to call it energy. Those open to the idea are also open to the meaning of Plato's divided line and qualities of light of the sun and the light of the Good..
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 9192
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Immanuel Can »

Nick_A wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:20 pm I see you are not familiar with the laws of vibration and as material vibrations increase matter becomes less dense and people begin to call it energy.
I'm not sure of the relevance, Nick.

But I am curious about something I asked before, and already answered for you: what's your personal "referee," or "judge," or "arbitrator," or "authority" when you run into a conflict between what you believe and what someone else does? How do you personally decide in such cases?

I ask because in order to come to a common understanding, I think we have to be agreeing on the basis of arbitration, don't we?
Skepdick
Posts: 5121
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Individualism vs. Collectivism

Post by Skepdick »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 11:01 pm I ask because in order to come to a common understanding, I think we have to be agreeing on the basis of arbitration, don't we?
You aren't interested in arbitration though? For you do not accept any arbiter (even the Universe) arbitrating against you.
Post Reply