## Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 5125
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:59 am quantify that for me. Long steps or short? Everything you say is assumed.
Whatever steps you feel like! As long as you take 3 billion, then 4 billion of them.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:46 am Yeah 1 step as an average is composed of 1 trillion steps of various lengths...1 is thus always an approximation and counting is just an assumption of reality
Well, you go do the experiment - and when you come back, tell me if your results agree with Pythagoras.

7 billion steps await you. Hurry up!
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Skepdick wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:03 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:59 am quantify that for me. Long steps or short? Everything you say is assumed.
Whatever steps you feel like! As long as you take 3 billion, then 4 billion of them.

What if it is a non finite number?

Seriously though, the step as quantified observes all quantities as having an problem of accurately observing reality.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:46 am Yeah 1 step as an average is composed of 1 trillion steps of various lengths...1 is thus always an approximation and counting is just an assumption of reality
Well, you go do the experiment - and when you come back, tell me if your results agree with Pythagoras.

7 billion steps await you. Hurry up!

False, standard, the experiment cannot be recorded thus your theory is null as it is not quantifying anything.
Skepdick
Posts: 5125
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:07 am False, standard, the experiment cannot be recorded thus your theory is null as it is not quantifying anything.
Why? Are you lazy or what?

At 3 steps/second you can pull this off in a life time.

If you got better things to do, I am happy if you go with 30 million steps. Choose our scale.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Skepdick wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:10 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:07 am False, standard, the experiment cannot be recorded thus your theory is null as it is not quantifying anything.
Why? Are you lazy or what?

At 3 steps/second you can pull this off in a life time.

If you got better things to do, I am happy if you go with 30 million steps. Choose our scale.
That is my point, no matter what number you choose, eventually not only does it become unprovable by it's own standard, but where it is possible the experiment only proves that "1" is a bell curve made of various other 1's and the foundations of measurement are premised on an assumed indeterminate state.
Skepdick
Posts: 5125
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:13 am That is my point, no matter what number you choose, eventually not only does it become unprovable by it's own standard, but where it is possible the experiment only proves that "1" is a bell curve made of various other 1's and the foundations of measurement are premised on an assumed indeterminate state.
Silly Platonist. Playing hide-and-seek with the numbers.

Like I said - I use them for counting.
I use dots for plotting.

You are welcome to keep looking for 1s and dots.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Skepdick wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:16 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:13 am That is my point, no matter what number you choose, eventually not only does it become unprovable by it's own standard, but where it is possible the experiment only proves that "1" is a bell curve made of various other 1's and the foundations of measurement are premised on an assumed indeterminate state.
Silly Platonist. Playing hide-and-seek with the numbers.

Like I said - I use them for counting. You are welcome to keep looking for 1.
Hence they are tools, and as such are created. But this leaves your stance in a contradiction, as the numbers are created but do not exist in a definite form. Even if they exist through the observer only, and the observer is a machine from your stance...then the machine is creating something.

1 can mean an infinite variety of things and as such is the beginning of assumption as an assumption.

The simple truth is you create a variety of terms to mask, in a fog of abstractions, that you do not know what you are doing and everything you say is just made up. It's all bullshit, and that is why you hate philosophy...because it reminds you of yourself.

That couch session was free.
Age
Posts: 5141
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pm
Age wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:41 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:46 am

I know assumptions exist recursively and isomorphically...assumptions are predictable...assuming we know what predictability really is.
This appears to be a very funny way to finish off.

"Assuming we know what predictability really is". To you, EVERY thing is assumed, so why question 'what predictability really is' now?

Of course, to you, 'what predictability really is' IS just another assumption. You could NEVER know what any thing really is, including 'predictability'. This is because you can not go against your own beliefs and assumptions. To do so would be to prove yourself WRONG. Therefore, you will start fighting harder and harder, believing more and more that you are Right. Taking a firm stance and NEVER shifting at all. Closing yourself off completely to being able to see any thing else other than what you BELIEVE wholeheartedly is true.

Now, I have already provided you with an example of 'what is not assumed'. That brain could have missed it, purposely, or unintentionally, and so disregarded that example and instead moved onto some thing else.

If that brain missed the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that is just another great example of how the brain blinds itself to what is actually true and real. When thee 'Truth' is not what the belief system says is true, then the brain is completely stopped from seeing the actual and real Truth of things.

If, however, that brain is smarter than what I am saying here and did not miss the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that brain would be able to prove this.

The majority of this was ad hominems.

The examples you gave where assumptions.

I can write the statement: "this statement is not assumed".

1. The statement is already composed of symbols and words which are assumed.
2. The statement as unassumed will only exist as such because of its self refentiality.
3. However this self refentiality is composed of assumptions and as such needs to continue in defintion.
4. All statements are simultaneously assumed and unassumed, with the lack of assumption meaning a disconnect. For example if I never assume something, I always seek further definition.

For example I might never assume my car is always running well, therefore I am always looking to define potential problems by checking it. If I assume something, I take it for what it is...ie the car is running well.
But that is NOT 'what it is'. The car, from your perspective, is only ASSUMED to be running well. From your perspective, you, obviously, do not know if the car is running well. As you will obviously have to admit. So, it is NOT 'what it is'. You only assume or think it is 'what it is'.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pmThe problem occurs in the respect that even if I assume the car is running well, it is still based upon a specific continuum of definitions (ie no scratches, good tires, new oil, etc.) that are taken for what is.
Being 'taken for what is', obviously does not mean that it is 'what is'.

You will NEVER know what IS, because you choose to assume every thing.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pm So even with a continuum of definitions these definitions are always assumed. However if I never assumed anything, and seek further definition, it is still requiring the definitions to be assumed.
This is obviously false. "it" does NOT require the definitions to be assumed. You only CHOOSE the definitions to be assumed, as I have already pointed out to you.

Making assumptions is a CHOOSE you make. You CHOOSE to make assumptions because if you did not, then that would refute your own beliefs, and coincidentally also your own assumptions, which obviously can be completely and utterly WRONG.

For you to do absolutely any thing other than to ASSUME absolutely every thing, then would refute your own distorted beliefs and assumptions.
Age
Posts: 5141
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pm
Age wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:41 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:46 am

I know assumptions exist recursively and isomorphically...assumptions are predictable...assuming we know what predictability really is.
This appears to be a very funny way to finish off.

"Assuming we know what predictability really is". To you, EVERY thing is assumed, so why question 'what predictability really is' now?

Of course, to you, 'what predictability really is' IS just another assumption. You could NEVER know what any thing really is, including 'predictability'. This is because you can not go against your own beliefs and assumptions. To do so would be to prove yourself WRONG. Therefore, you will start fighting harder and harder, believing more and more that you are Right. Taking a firm stance and NEVER shifting at all. Closing yourself off completely to being able to see any thing else other than what you BELIEVE wholeheartedly is true.

Now, I have already provided you with an example of 'what is not assumed'. That brain could have missed it, purposely, or unintentionally, and so disregarded that example and instead moved onto some thing else.

If that brain missed the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that is just another great example of how the brain blinds itself to what is actually true and real. When thee 'Truth' is not what the belief system says is true, then the brain is completely stopped from seeing the actual and real Truth of things.

If, however, that brain is smarter than what I am saying here and did not miss the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that brain would be able to prove this.

The majority of this was ad hominems.
Put in point form a list of what you ASSUME are ad hominems, and we will see how close to the Truth your ASSUMPTION here is.

The examples you gave where assumptions.[/quote]

That is just your ASSUMPTION, AND, I already KNOW that you BELIEVE that every thing I say is an assumption.

You do not have to keep repeating the obvious.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pmI can write the statement: "this statement is not assumed".

1. The statement is already composed of symbols and words which are assumed.
2. The statement as unassumed will only exist as such because of its self refentiality.
3. However this self refentiality is composed of assumptions and as such needs to continue in defintion.
4. All statements are simultaneously assumed and unassumed, with the lack of assumption meaning a disconnect. For example if I never assume something, I always seek further definition.
These are ALL your ASSUMPTIONS only, which obviously can be WRONG and FALSE, which some clearly are.

Furthermore, I KNOW that this is what you believe is true, and, that this is what YOU DO. You have repeated the same thing over and over again. Did you miss the part where I said I wholeheartedly agree with you that every thing you say is an assumption, which could be completely and utterly WRONG and FALSE?

Did you also miss the part where I said I agree that this is what YOU DO?

Are you at all aware that what YOU DO is not necessarily what I DO?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pmFor example I might never assume my car is always running well, therefore I am always looking to define potential problems by checking it. If I assume something, I take it for what it is...ie the car is running well.

The problem occurs in the respect that even if I assume the car is running well, it is still based upon a specific continuum of definitions (ie no scratches, good tires, new oil, etc.) that are taken for what is. So even with a continuum of definitions these definitions are always assumed. However if I never assumed anything, and seek further definition, it is still requiring the definitions to be assumed.
I also note that you have not once in this reply actually replied to the points I made. Some of which are;

I already gave you an example of what is not assumed.

How that brain misses things, because it already believes it knows what is true and false.

Why do you question what 'really is' IF you only assume things anyway?
Skepdick
Posts: 5125
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am Hence they are tools, and as such are created. But this leaves your stance in a contradiction, as the numbers are created but do not exist in a definite form. Even if they exist through the observer only, and the observer is a machine from your stance...then the machine is creating something.
You aren't paying attention... I have been arguing for constructivist epistemology and constructive mathematics.

What the machine is building is a map of the territory. A model. Like LEGO.

Hence model-dependent realism.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am 1 can mean an infinite variety of things and as such is the beginning of assumption as an assumption.
Which is why in physics you append a unit to signify what it is that you are counting. 1 meter.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am The simple truth is you create a variety of terms to mask, in a fog of abstractions
This fog of abstraction is called complexity.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am that you do not know what you are doing and everything you say is just made up.
So how come the models work?
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am It's all bullshit, and that is why you hate philosophy...because it reminds you of yourself.

That couch session was free.
Of all the fields that are bullshit, psychology is right up there...

That couch session wasn't free. Philosophy makes you dumb - you pay for it.

Abstract knowledge stops being abstract the moment it makes contact with the ground.

Take any particular function f(x) = y and realize it. a.k.a create it.

Applied mathematics. Applied science. Applied engineering.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Age wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:21 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pm
Age wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:41 am

This appears to be a very funny way to finish off.

"Assuming we know what predictability really is". To you, EVERY thing is assumed, so why question 'what predictability really is' now?

Of course, to you, 'what predictability really is' IS just another assumption. You could NEVER know what any thing really is, including 'predictability'. This is because you can not go against your own beliefs and assumptions. To do so would be to prove yourself WRONG. Therefore, you will start fighting harder and harder, believing more and more that you are Right. Taking a firm stance and NEVER shifting at all. Closing yourself off completely to being able to see any thing else other than what you BELIEVE wholeheartedly is true.

Now, I have already provided you with an example of 'what is not assumed'. That brain could have missed it, purposely, or unintentionally, and so disregarded that example and instead moved onto some thing else.

If that brain missed the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that is just another great example of how the brain blinds itself to what is actually true and real. When thee 'Truth' is not what the belief system says is true, then the brain is completely stopped from seeing the actual and real Truth of things.

If, however, that brain is smarter than what I am saying here and did not miss the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that brain would be able to prove this.

The majority of this was ad hominems.

The examples you gave where assumptions.

I can write the statement: "this statement is not assumed".

1. The statement is already composed of symbols and words which are assumed.
2. The statement as unassumed will only exist as such because of its self refentiality.
3. However this self refentiality is composed of assumptions and as such needs to continue in defintion.
4. All statements are simultaneously assumed and unassumed, with the lack of assumption meaning a disconnect. For example if I never assume something, I always seek further definition.

For example I might never assume my car is always running well, therefore I am always looking to define potential problems by checking it. If I assume something, I take it for what it is...ie the car is running well.
But that is NOT 'what it is'. The car, from your perspective, is only ASSUMED to be running well. From your perspective, you, obviously, do not know if the car is running well. As you will obviously have to admit. So, it is NOT 'what it is'. You only assume or think it is 'what it is'.

And if I hear a rumbling, I also assume something is wrong. Both functions, good and bad, of the car are determined by the assumption of certain definitions of what a good and bad running car are.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pmThe problem occurs in the respect that even if I assume the car is running well, it is still based upon a specific continuum of definitions (ie no scratches, good tires, new oil, etc.) that are taken for what is.
Being 'taken for what is', obviously does not mean that it is 'what is'.

Still an assumption. If the car is good or bad based upon definitions. The most we can observe is the connection of assumptions.

You will NEVER know what IS, because you choose to assume every thing.

Choice, is an assumption. The continual connection and seperation of assumption observes choice is not always applicable under certain contexts. The linear projection of one assumption to another is inevitable. Same with the cycling. Same with each assumption as grounded in a point of awareness.

These forms are inevitable, thus assumption is inseperable from form.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pm So even with a continuum of definitions these definitions are always assumed. However if I never assumed anything, and seek further definition, it is still requiring the definitions to be assumed.
This is obviously false. "it" does NOT require the definitions to be assumed. You only CHOOSE the definitions to be assumed, as I have already pointed out to you.

False. X is composed of y requires y to be assumed. Y is composed of a requires Z to be assumed....etc. X is assumed because Z is assumed. What we observe is a connection of x,y,a but this is an assumption.

Assumption and form are inseperable and the form "just is".

Making assumptions is a CHOOSE you make. You CHOOSE to make assumptions because if you did not, then that would refute your own beliefs, and coincidentally also your own assumptions, which obviously can be completely and utterly WRONG.

For you to do absolutely any thing other than to ASSUME absolutely every thing, then would refute your own distorted beliefs and assumptions.

You are assuming free will alone.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Age wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:34 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pm
Age wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:41 am

This appears to be a very funny way to finish off.

"Assuming we know what predictability really is". To you, EVERY thing is assumed, so why question 'what predictability really is' now?

Of course, to you, 'what predictability really is' IS just another assumption. You could NEVER know what any thing really is, including 'predictability'. This is because you can not go against your own beliefs and assumptions. To do so would be to prove yourself WRONG. Therefore, you will start fighting harder and harder, believing more and more that you are Right. Taking a firm stance and NEVER shifting at all. Closing yourself off completely to being able to see any thing else other than what you BELIEVE wholeheartedly is true.

Now, I have already provided you with an example of 'what is not assumed'. That brain could have missed it, purposely, or unintentionally, and so disregarded that example and instead moved onto some thing else.

If that brain missed the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that is just another great example of how the brain blinds itself to what is actually true and real. When thee 'Truth' is not what the belief system says is true, then the brain is completely stopped from seeing the actual and real Truth of things.

If, however, that brain is smarter than what I am saying here and did not miss the example I gave of 'what is not assumed', then that brain would be able to prove this.

The majority of this was ad hominems.
Put in point form a list of what you ASSUME are ad hominems, and we will see how close to the Truth your ASSUMPTION here is.

The examples you gave where assumptions.
That is just your ASSUMPTION, AND, I already KNOW that you BELIEVE that every thing I say is an assumption.

You do not have to keep repeating the obvious.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pmI can write the statement: "this statement is not assumed".

1. The statement is already composed of symbols and words which are assumed.
2. The statement as unassumed will only exist as such because of its self refentiality.
3. However this self refentiality is composed of assumptions and as such needs to continue in defintion.
4. All statements are simultaneously assumed and unassumed, with the lack of assumption meaning a disconnect. For example if I never assume something, I always seek further definition.
These are ALL your ASSUMPTIONS only, which obviously can be WRONG and FALSE, which some clearly are.

Furthermore, I KNOW that this is what you believe is true, and, that this is what YOU DO. You have repeated the same thing over and over again. Did you miss the part where I said I wholeheartedly agree with you that every thing you say is an assumption, which could be completely and utterly WRONG and FALSE?

It being wrong or false still requires wrong and false to be assumed.

Did you also miss the part where I said I agree that this is what YOU DO?

Are you at all aware that what YOU DO is not necessarily what I DO?

I am aware you assume your position as such.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Tue Aug 13, 2019 9:53 pmFor example I might never assume my car is always running well, therefore I am always looking to define potential problems by checking it. If I assume something, I take it for what it is...ie the car is running well.

The problem occurs in the respect that even if I assume the car is running well, it is still based upon a specific continuum of definitions (ie no scratches, good tires, new oil, etc.) that are taken for what is. So even with a continuum of definitions these definitions are always assumed. However if I never assumed anything, and seek further definition, it is still requiring the definitions to be assumed.
I also note that you have not once in this reply actually replied to the points I made. Some of which are;

I already gave you an example of what is not assumed.

I replied to each one of the list and why they are composed of assumptions and exist as assumptions because of it. You ignoring of what is presented is the diverging from one set of assumptions for your own.

How that brain misses things, because it already believes it knows what is true and false.

I know your argument is proof that you assume yourself as correct.

Why do you question what 'really is' IF you only assume things anyway?
[/quote]
Assumption is form and form is assumption. Being is grounded in form...Plato and Zen...reread the title of the thread.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Skepdick wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:10 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am Hence they are tools, and as such are created. But this leaves your stance in a contradiction, as the numbers are created but do not exist in a definite form. Even if they exist through the observer only, and the observer is a machine from your stance...then the machine is creating something.
You aren't paying attention... I have been arguing for constructivist epistemology and constructive mathematics.

What the machine is building is a map of the territory. A model. Like LEGO.

Yes, and something (a model) composed of numbers (legos) thus numbers are created.

Hence model-dependent realism.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am 1 can mean an infinite variety of things and as such is the beginning of assumption as an assumption.
Which is why in physics you append a unit to signify what it is that you are counting. 1 meter.

Thus requiring an assumed starting point.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am The simple truth is you create a variety of terms to mask, in a fog of abstractions
This fog of abstraction is called complexity.

Complexity is multiplicity of axioms. An abstract "point" is very simple.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am that you do not know what you are doing and everything you say is just made up.
So how come the models work?

"Work" is a defintion of context. All equations are the localization of specific numbers out of infinite numbers.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:26 am It's all bullshit, and that is why you hate philosophy...because it reminds you of yourself.

That couch session was free.
Of all the fields that are bullshit, psychology is right up there...

That couch session wasn't free. Philosophy makes you dumb - you pay for it.

Says the man basing his grounding off of theories about numbers, with no real defintion of a number but strict assumptions.

Tell me, does counting things to make a paycheck so you can eat and drink more than you need, or give you what you "want" change the fact "want" is always present? It just repeats itself in constant variation.

Abstract knowledge stops being abstract the moment it makes contact with the ground.

True, and the ground stops becoming the ground when it moves towards an abstract form.

Take any particular function f(x) = y and realize it. a.k.a create it.

Applied mathematics. Applied science. Applied engineering.

And if number does not exist...what are you really applying?
If philosophy is a waste of time, why do you keep creating new accounts to come back here?
Skepdick
Posts: 5125
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Yes, and something (a model) composed of numbers (legos) thus numbers are created.
All Mathematics is created!
All language is created!

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Thus requiring an assumed starting point
The starting point is human experience. The Imperial system is all about that. Inches, feet, pounds, yards!
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm An abstract "point" is very simple.
Unless it represents The Universe.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Says the man basing his grounding off of theories about numbers, with no real defintion of a number but strict assumptions.
Do you have a better system? You've failed to convince me so far.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Tell me, does counting things to make a paycheck so you can eat and drink more than you need, or give you what you "want" change the fact "want" is always present? It just repeats itself in constant variation
You got that backwards. I make the paycheck so that I can work less than I want to. Work smart not hard.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm And if number does not exist...what are you really applying?
Magic sprinkly Unicorn dust!
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm If philosophy is a waste of time, why do you keep creating new accounts to come back here?
Because the Church of Philosophy is not up in flames yet.
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 6220
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Skepdick wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:13 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Yes, and something (a model) composed of numbers (legos) thus numbers are created.
All Mathematics is created!
All language is created!

Yes but numbers do not exist according to you.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Thus requiring an assumed starting point
The starting point is human experience. The Imperial system is all about that. Inches, feet, pounds, yards!

And the human experience begins with emptymind/blank slate, thus is grounded in point space.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm An abstract "point" is very simple.
Unless it represents The Universe.

Still a single point.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Says the man basing his grounding off of theories about numbers, with no real defintion of a number but strict assumptions.
Do you have a better system? You've failed to convince me so far.

I dont have any system, I am merely observing what is.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm Tell me, does counting things to make a paycheck so you can eat and drink more than you need, or give you what you "want" change the fact "want" is always present? It just repeats itself in constant variation
You got that backwards. I make the paycheck so that I can work less than I want to. Work smart not hard.

work is inevitable, one moves even in a state of luxury.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm And if number does not exist...what are you really applying?
Magic sprinkly Unicorn dust!

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:52 pm If philosophy is a waste of time, why do you keep creating new accounts to come back here?
Because the Church of Philosophy is not up in flames yet.

And if it does, all your numbers disappear. You have to keep in mind, everything you measure and count is fundamentally all the other people's philosophies of life materialized.
How people view even dangerous is a philosophy of life, a way of viewing things.

Philosophy, ie knowledge and the application of knowledge, is what allows you to "work less". It is all ideas, even how the public consumes is formed through ideas.

So what does a world without philosophy exist like?
Skepdick
Posts: 5125
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

### Re: Platonism, Zen and the Munchauseen Trillema as Bridge for Eastern and Western Philosophy

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:13 pm Yes but numbers do not exist according to you.
Eodnhoj7 wrote: Wed Aug 14, 2019 5:13 pm So what does a world without philosophy exist like?
Trivial question. Define the function which determines whether any particular objects "exists", will you?
The function takes ANY input and returns True or False.

True if the object exists.
False if the object doens't exist.

Code: Select all

``````def exists?(object)
if [some condition] then
return # true or false
elsif [some other condition] then
return # True or false
end
``````
Once you've written this simple function I expect it to return things like

exists?(Unicorn) -> False
exist?(Universe) -> True

Once you've written this function then we can ask it if numbers exist. OK?