Philosophy AI

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

The unity of all being necessitates the most seemingly seperate terms as fundamentally connected. A "wisdom" generator, ie AI, would be the tying of these seemingly seperate terms together to form a statement. From the perspective of all being connected this necessitates the most absurd sayings as having fundamental meaning upon closer inspection. A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of any words.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am The unity of all being necessitates the most seemingly seperate terms as fundamentally connected. A "wisdom" generator, ie AI, would be the tying of these seemingly seperate terms together to form a statement. From the perspective of all being connected this necessitates the most absurd sayings as having fundamental meaning upon closer inspection.
Will you provide an example of a "most absurd saying", which, supposedly, also "has fundamental meaning"?

If no, then WHY NOT?

But, if yes, then I look forward to your example/s.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of any words.
Really?

Again, will you provide ANY examples?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 9:00 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am The unity of all being necessitates the most seemingly seperate terms as fundamentally connected. A "wisdom" generator, ie AI, would be the tying of these seemingly seperate terms together to form a statement. From the perspective of all being connected this necessitates the most absurd sayings as having fundamental meaning upon closer inspection.
Will you provide an example of a "most absurd saying", which, supposedly, also "has fundamental meaning"?

If no, then WHY NOT?

But, if yes, then I look forward to your example/s.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of any words.
Really?

Again, will you provide ANY examples?
Example: The Republican party had sex with the Democratic party.

Meaning: The Republican party united with the Democratic party.

You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 5:22 pm
Age wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 9:00 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am The unity of all being necessitates the most seemingly seperate terms as fundamentally connected. A "wisdom" generator, ie AI, would be the tying of these seemingly seperate terms together to form a statement. From the perspective of all being connected this necessitates the most absurd sayings as having fundamental meaning upon closer inspection.
Will you provide an example of a "most absurd saying", which, supposedly, also "has fundamental meaning"?

If no, then WHY NOT?

But, if yes, then I look forward to your example/s.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 1:44 am A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of any words.
Really?

Again, will you provide ANY examples?
Example: The Republican party had sex with the Democratic party.

Meaning: The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
Well if that is what that saying fundamentally means, then what is, supposedly, 'absurd' about that saying?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 5:22 pm You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Thu May 20, 2021 7:44 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 5:22 pm
Age wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 9:00 am

Will you provide an example of a "most absurd saying", which, supposedly, also "has fundamental meaning"?

If no, then WHY NOT?

But, if yes, then I look forward to your example/s.



Really?

Again, will you provide ANY examples?
Example: The Republican party had sex with the Democratic party.

Meaning: The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
Well if that is what that saying fundamentally means, then what is, supposedly, 'absurd' about that saying?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 5:22 pm You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,
Absurdity is an absence of commonality, the absence of expressing a statement in a common way is absurdity.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 24, 2021 11:56 pm
Age wrote: Thu May 20, 2021 7:44 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 5:22 pm

Example: The Republican party had sex with the Democratic party.

Meaning: The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
Well if that is what that saying fundamentally means, then what is, supposedly, 'absurd' about that saying?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue May 18, 2021 5:22 pm You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,
Absurdity is an absence of commonality, the absence of expressing a statement in a common way is absurdity.
So, how, exactly, does one express the statement, 'The republican party had sex with the democratic party', which is not in absence of a "common way"?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 10:48 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 24, 2021 11:56 pm
Age wrote: Thu May 20, 2021 7:44 am

Well if that is what that saying fundamentally means, then what is, supposedly, 'absurd' about that saying?
Absurdity is an absence of commonality, the absence of expressing a statement in a common way is absurdity.
So, how, exactly, does one express the statement, 'The republican party had sex with the democratic party', which is not in absence of a "common way"?
The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 31, 2021 5:36 pm
Age wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 10:48 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 24, 2021 11:56 pm
Absurdity is an absence of commonality, the absence of expressing a statement in a common way is absurdity.
So, how, exactly, does one express the statement, 'The republican party had sex with the democratic party', which is not in absence of a "common way"?
The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
So, expressing, "the republican party united with the democratic party", is not in absence of a common way, and so is not absurd, but, expressing,"the republican party had sex with the democratic party", is in absence of a common way, and so is absurd, but you still KNOW what its fundamental meaning is, correct?
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:47 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 31, 2021 5:36 pm
Age wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 10:48 am

So, how, exactly, does one express the statement, 'The republican party had sex with the democratic party', which is not in absence of a "common way"?
The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
So, expressing, "the republican party united with the democratic party", is not in absence of a common way, and so is not absurd, but, expressing,"the republican party had sex with the democratic party", is in absence of a common way, and so is absurd, but you still KNOW what its fundamental meaning is, correct?
Few people will know its meaning, most will not. This is because it is not a common way. A common way is that in which most people will understand.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:41 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:47 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon May 31, 2021 5:36 pm
The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
So, expressing, "the republican party united with the democratic party", is not in absence of a common way, and so is not absurd, but, expressing,"the republican party had sex with the democratic party", is in absence of a common way, and so is absurd, but you still KNOW what its fundamental meaning is, correct?
Few people will know its meaning, most will not. This is because it is not a common way. A common way is that in which most people will understand.
Okay, but what has this got to do with your claim that, "A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of ANY words"?

You have also said, "You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,"

An example that I will provide is;

I am the One and ONLY united One.

By 'your' logic that is a rational statement. So, now, how do you interpret that rational statement.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:38 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:41 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:47 am

So, expressing, "the republican party united with the democratic party", is not in absence of a common way, and so is not absurd, but, expressing,"the republican party had sex with the democratic party", is in absence of a common way, and so is absurd, but you still KNOW what its fundamental meaning is, correct?
Few people will know its meaning, most will not. This is because it is not a common way. A common way is that in which most people will understand.
Okay, but what has this got to do with your claim that, "A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of ANY words"?

You have also said, "You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,"

An example that I will provide is;

I am the One and ONLY united One.

By 'your' logic that is a rational statement. So, now, how do you interpret that rational statement.
I am a singular being whose parts are United and as both singular and United I am the only one thus making me the singular entity, who exists in such a way, amidst many.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 7:09 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:38 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:41 pm

Few people will know its meaning, most will not. This is because it is not a common way. A common way is that in which most people will understand.
Okay, but what has this got to do with your claim that, "A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of ANY words"?

You have also said, "You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,"

An example that I will provide is;

I am the One and ONLY united One.

By 'your' logic that is a rational statement. So, now, how do you interpret that rational statement.
I am a singular being whose parts are United and as both singular and United I am the only one thus making me the singular entity, who exists in such a way, amidst many.
HOW can there be "many" if, and when there is ONLY One?

VERY CLOSE interpretation to what thee ACTUALLY Truth of things IS, by the way.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 7:09 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:38 am

Okay, but what has this got to do with your claim that, "A rational statement can be formed together from the tying together of ANY words"?

You have also said, "You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,"

An example that I will provide is;

I am the One and ONLY united One.

By 'your' logic that is a rational statement. So, now, how do you interpret that rational statement.
I am a singular being whose parts are United and as both singular and United I am the only one thus making me the singular entity, who exists in such a way, amidst many.
HOW can there be "many" if, and when there is ONLY One?

VERY CLOSE interpretation to what thee ACTUALLY Truth of things IS, by the way.
Because United necessitates a series of parts working together. Being the only United one implies there are others which are not united.
Age
Posts: 20043
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Age »

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:11 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 7:09 pm
I am a singular being whose parts are United and as both singular and United I am the only one thus making me the singular entity, who exists in such a way, amidst many.
HOW can there be "many" if, and when there is ONLY One?

VERY CLOSE interpretation to what thee ACTUALLY Truth of things IS, by the way.
Because United necessitates a series of parts working together.
This is very True, but this does NOT answer the actual clarifying question I asked here.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:11 pm Being the only United one implies there are others which are not united.
This is completely Untrue.

Being the only united One does NOT imply there are "others", which are not united. Being the ONLY united One actually means that there is NO "other". The 'only' word makes this CLEAR.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 8595
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Philosophy AI

Post by Eodnhoj7 »

Age wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 5:39 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:11 pm
Age wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 am

HOW can there be "many" if, and when there is ONLY One?

VERY CLOSE interpretation to what thee ACTUALLY Truth of things IS, by the way.
Because United necessitates a series of parts working together.
This is very True, but this does NOT answer the actual clarifying question I asked here.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:11 pm Being the only United one implies there are others which are not united.
This is completely Untrue.

Being the only united One does NOT imply there are "others", which are not united. Being the ONLY united One actually means that there is NO "other". The 'only' word makes this CLEAR.
It implies there are others which are un-united.
Post Reply