Philosophy AI
Philosophy AI
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.
Re: Philosophy AI
Will you provide an example of a "most absurd saying", which, supposedly, also "has fundamental meaning"?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.
If no, then WHY NOT?
But, if yes, then I look forward to your example/s.
Really?
Again, will you provide ANY examples?
Re: Philosophy AI
Example: The Republican party had sex with the Democratic party.Age wrote: ↑Tue May 18, 2021 9:00 amWill you provide an example of a "most absurd saying", which, supposedly, also "has fundamental meaning"?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.
If no, then WHY NOT?
But, if yes, then I look forward to your example/s.
Really?
Again, will you provide ANY examples?
Meaning: The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
You can provide examples and I will interpret them for you,
Re: Philosophy AI
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 pmExample: The Republican party had sex with the Democratic party.Age wrote: ↑Tue May 18, 2021 9:00 amWill you provide an example of a "most absurd saying", which, supposedly, also "has fundamental meaning"?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.
If no, then WHY NOT?
But, if yes, then I look forward to your example/s.
Really?
Again, will you provide ANY examples?
Meaning: The Republican party united with the Democratic party.
Re: Philosophy AI
Absurdity is an absence of commonality, the absence of expressing a statement in a common way is absurdity.Age wrote: ↑Thu May 20, 2021 7:44 amWell if that is what that saying fundamentally means, then what is, supposedly, 'absurd' about that saying?
Re: Philosophy AI
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"?
Re: Philosophy AI
Re: Philosophy AI
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?
Re: Philosophy AI
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 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:47 amSo, 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?
Re: Philosophy AI
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"?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:41 pmFew 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 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:47 amSo, 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?
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.
Re: Philosophy AI
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 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:38 amOkay, 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"?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:41 pmFew 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 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?
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.
Re: Philosophy AI
HOW can there be "many" if, and when there is ONLY One?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 7:09 pmI 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 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:38 amOkay, 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.
VERY CLOSE interpretation to what thee ACTUALLY Truth of things IS, by the way.
Re: Philosophy AI
Because United necessitates a series of parts working together. Being the only United one implies there are others which are not united.Age wrote: ↑Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:00 amHOW can there be "many" if, and when there is ONLY One?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 7:09 pmI 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 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.
VERY CLOSE interpretation to what thee ACTUALLY Truth of things IS, by the way.
Re: Philosophy AI
This is very True, but this does NOT answer the actual clarifying question I asked here.
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.
Re: Philosophy AI
It implies there are others which are un-united.Age wrote: ↑Wed Jun 09, 2021 5:39 amThis is very True, but this does NOT answer the actual clarifying question I asked here.
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.