The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
- Agent Smith
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
Are you experiencing any aches and pains, sir/madam, as the case may be?
Tylenol 500 mg TID × 5 days, if you are.
Tylenol 500 mg TID × 5 days, if you are.
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
OR, there IS the OTHER 'thing', which we CAN CHOOSE FRO, and, which by the way, IS the ACTUAL, and IRREFUTABLE, Truth of 'things'.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
The above written under the label "eodnoj7" is just NONSENSE, and VERY MISLEADING I will add.
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
I'm not very good at this sort of stuff, but I'm good enough at it to be able to tell that you are even worse.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
- Agent Smith
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
You're wrong!Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Apr 29, 2023 8:50 amI'm not very good at this sort of stuff, but I'm good enough at it to be able to tell that you are even worse.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
1. For all x(if x is bad, Agent smith is worse than x)
2. For all x(if x is a person and x is the worst then x = Agent Smith)
Everything & Nothing ... then there's also Something. God have mercy on our souls!
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
If it was nonsense then it would not be misleading as it has to make some sense in order to mislead. On the other hand ff course it is non-sense, the logic behind the laws of logic self-negates these very same laws when self-referencing.Age wrote: ↑Sat Apr 29, 2023 7:05 amOR, there IS the OTHER 'thing', which we CAN CHOOSE FRO, and, which by the way, IS the ACTUAL, and IRREFUTABLE, Truth of 'things'.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
The above written under the label "eodnoj7" is just NONSENSE, and VERY MISLEADING I will add.
Last edited by Eodnhoj7 on Wed May 03, 2023 9:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
The laws of logic contradict when applied to themselves....that is all you need to know. If one is true then the other is false when the law of excluded middle is applied to them.Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Apr 29, 2023 8:50 amI'm not very good at this sort of stuff, but I'm good enough at it to be able to tell that you are even worse.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
Last edited by Eodnhoj7 on Wed May 03, 2023 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
Do you understand my argument?Agent Smith wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 3:09 pmYou're wrong!Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Apr 29, 2023 8:50 amI'm not very good at this sort of stuff, but I'm good enough at it to be able to tell that you are even worse.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
1. For all x(if x is bad, Agent smith is worse than x)
2. For all x(if x is a person and x is the worst then x = Agent Smith)
Everything & Nothing ... then there's also Something. God have mercy on our souls!
- Agent Smith
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
Nice moves, fancy footwork there mon ami, You seem to have grasped the logical essence of your claim!Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
Is that so?Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 8:25 pmIf it was nonsense then it would not be misleading as it has to make some sense in order to mislead.Age wrote: ↑Sat Apr 29, 2023 7:05 amOR, there IS the OTHER 'thing', which we CAN CHOOSE FRO, and, which by the way, IS the ACTUAL, and IRREFUTABLE, Truth of 'things'.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 9:12 pm This can be observed when the laws of logic self-reference in certain degrees. Either the law of identity (equality) or the law of non-contradiction (non-equality) exists when the law of excluded middle is applied to them. If the law of identity is true, and law of non-contradiction is false, then A=A and A=-A (the actual is equal to the non-actual). Under these terms A equals everything. If non-contradiction is true, and the law of identity is false, then A=/=-A but A=/=A (A does not equal anything; if A were to equal B or C it could not because B or C would be the equivalent of saying, at the meta level, A=A if B or C is A). Under these terms A equals nothing.
Either there is everything or there is nothing and this 'or' nature to the argument necessitates a choice thus manifesting the question of "everything or nothing?" as fundamentally a subjective grasp of reality. This subjective nature necessitates the answer to the question as fundamentally random.
The above written under the label "eodnoj7" is just NONSENSE, and VERY MISLEADING I will add.
Is it NOT possible to MISLEAD some of the people, some of the time, with what IS, essentially, ACTUALLY NONSENSE?
Now, if what IS ACTUALLY NONSENSE, makes sense to some people, then this STILL does NOT take away from the Fact (of) 'what IS'.
If you say and BELIEVE so, then 'it' MUST BE so, right?
- Agent Smith
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
You have a point, but - there's always a but, right? - as far as I'm concerned the OP gets a 7/10 in mental gymnastics! That's a gold-medal score, oui?Age wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 2:48 amIs that so?
Is it NOT possible to MISLEAD some of the people, some of the time, with what IS, essentially, ACTUALLY NONSENSE?
Now, if what IS ACTUALLY NONSENSE, makes sense to some people, then this STILL does NOT take away from the Fact (of) 'what IS'.If you say and BELIEVE so, then 'it' MUST BE so, right?
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
No, BUT some might think or BELIEVE there is.Agent Smith wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 3:49 amYou have a point, but - there's always a but, right?Age wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 2:48 amIs that so?
Is it NOT possible to MISLEAD some of the people, some of the time, with what IS, essentially, ACTUALLY NONSENSE?
Now, if what IS ACTUALLY NONSENSE, makes sense to some people, then this STILL does NOT take away from the Fact (of) 'what IS'.If you say and BELIEVE so, then 'it' MUST BE so, right?
Agent Smith wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 3:49 am- as far as I'm concerned the OP gets a 7/10 in mental gymnastics! That's a gold-medal score, oui?
- Agent Smith
- Posts: 1442
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
Age wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 4:08 amNo, BUT some might think or BELIEVE there is.Agent Smith wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 3:49 amYou have a point, but - there's always a but, right?Age wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 2:48 am
Is that so?
Is it NOT possible to MISLEAD some of the people, some of the time, with what IS, essentially, ACTUALLY NONSENSE?
Now, if what IS ACTUALLY NONSENSE, makes sense to some people, then this STILL does NOT take away from the Fact (of) 'what IS'.
If you say and BELIEVE so, then 'it' MUST BE so, right?
Agent Smith wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 3:49 am- as far as I'm concerned the OP gets a 7/10 in mental gymnastics! That's a gold-medal score, oui?
You're the future mon ami ... one of the branches on which philosophy terminates. Nice to meet you sir/ma'am as the case may be.
As you can see philosophy is, the OP included, simply rearranging the furniture in yer house- a walk in the park, easy peasy!
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
To me EVERY human being is born a Natural and True 'philosopher', and HAVING 'philosophy' IS UNAVOIDABLE. BUT, which, VERY SADLY, gets LOST, MISPLACED, and REPLACED 'aling the way' by UNKNOWINGLY and UNINTENTIONALLY Wrong DOING ADULTS who end up turning those True 'philosophers' INTO Truly STUPID ASSUMING and BELIEVING adults human beings.Agent Smith wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 4:39 amAge wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 4:08 amNo, BUT some might think or BELIEVE there is.
Agent Smith wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 3:49 am- as far as I'm concerned the OP gets a 7/10 in mental gymnastics! That's a gold-medal score, oui?
You're the future mon ami ... one of the branches on which philosophy terminates. Nice to meet you sir/ma'am as the case may be.
As you can see philosophy is, the OP included, simply rearranging the furniture in yer house- a walk in the park, easy peasy!
It is BECAUSE if being born WITH and HAVING the True love-of-wisdom and HAVING the ABILITY to LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and REASON ANY and EVERY 'thing' children, AGAIN VERY SADLY, and VERY UNFORTUNATELY, end up COPYING, and growing INTO, adult human beings.
Re: The Logic Behind Everything and Nothing
The only thing the 'human being' needs to understand as a philosopher, via ''thought'' is that everything is fundamentally nothing ( no thought required to understand this ) nothing is known AS AND THROUGH the experience of being aware, it is known via experience that ( being aware is simply self-evident, effortless and requires no thought to be )Age wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 5:06 am
To me EVERY human being is born a Natural and True 'philosopher', and HAVING 'philosophy' IS UNAVOIDABLE. BUT, which, VERY SADLY, gets LOST, MISPLACED, and REPLACED 'aling the way' by UNKNOWINGLY and UNINTENTIONALLY Wrong DOING ADULTS who end up turning those True 'philosophers' INTO Truly STUPID ASSUMING and BELIEVING adults human beings.
It is BECAUSE if being born WITH and HAVING the True love-of-wisdom and HAVING the ABILITY to LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and REASON ANY and EVERY 'thing' children, AGAIN VERY SADLY, and VERY UNFORTUNATELY, end up COPYING, and growing INTO, adult human beings.
That understood,is to simply know you know nothing, and yet to know you know nothing, is to also know everything,which can only be the same as nothingness at it's fundamental base level. It's only ''thought'' that seemingly changes NOTHINGNESS into SOMETHING or EVERYTHING.
The empty SILENT space between all ''thought'' is all there is to know, meaning, there is nothing knowing every THOUGHT ....meaning all ''thought'' is fundamentally empty, only appearing as something, meaning, 'thoughts' are appearances in the same context every dream is an appearance of something, full of images and stories, which are in essence quite inanimate, and yet appear animate, biological, and seemingly psychological and spiritual....in this apparent conception, nothing is making.
There is here, now here, nowhere, only nothing being everything, and that's all there is to understand. Philosophy and philosophizing goes nowhere, because there is nowhere else to go.
The ultimate point of view is that there is nothing to understand, so when we try to understand, we are only indulging in acrobatics of the mind.