Silly old Isaac Newton. And there's me thinking he came up with this abstractionSkepdick wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 10:09 pmThe circular reasoning is hilarious.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 9:31 pm Well, we know that things fall.... We know that something is causing them to fall. Whatever causes things to fall is called gravity, but we don't know what it is.
If you didn't pre-suppose falling to be the effect of some unknown cause you wouldn't have to fill the self-inflicted void with "gravity".
Philosophy undermines truth
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
The confusion between the formal and the informal is incredible.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 6:13 amSilly old Isaac Newton. And there's me thinking he came up with this abstractionSkepdick wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 10:09 pmThe circular reasoning is hilarious.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 9:31 pm Well, we know that things fall.... We know that something is causing them to fall. Whatever causes things to fall is called gravity, but we don't know what it is.
If you didn't pre-suppose falling to be the effect of some unknown cause you wouldn't have to fill the self-inflicted void with "gravity".
The formalism encodes what's effectively a gemoetric reationship between mass and distance.
The English encodes a story of cause and effect.
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
Since you are still confused, let me clear things up for you:Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 7:21 amThe confusion between the formal and the informal is incredible.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 6:13 amSilly old Isaac Newton. And there's me thinking he came up with this abstraction
That's science.
And as I keep saying philosophy is story telling.
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
No shit.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 7:49 amSince you are still confused, let me clear things up for you:Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 7:21 amThe confusion between the formal and the informal is incredible.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 6:13 am Silly old Isaac Newton. And there's me thinking he came up with this abstractionThat's science.
As Einstein showed us - there's another encoding possible.
And as computer scientists showed us - there are some limits to encodings and formal systems.
And as I keep saying "story telling" is an euphemism for lying.
Did you click the "Submit" button before you finished clearing things up for me?
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
You don't think general relativity is "effectively a gemoetric reationship between mass and distance"? As it happens, Einstein based GR on a story about a malleable substance which is warped by matter: "According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable." https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/E ... ein_ether/Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 7:52 amNo shit.
As Einstein showed us - there's another encoding possible.
What they have shown is that there are limits they don't yet know how to get through.
Do you think all stories are lies?
Tragically in your case that will always be so.
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
All formalisms are geometric. It's all syntax.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:16 am You don't think general relativity is "effectively a gemoetric reationship between mass and distance"?
And here I thought he based it on a Minkowsky space.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:16 am As it happens, Einstein based GR on a story about a malleable substance which is warped by matter
That's a peculiar use of "know" given the limits of computer science are the limits of knowlede.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:16 am What they have shown is that there are limits they don't yet know how to get through.
Of course. ALl models are wrong - some are useful.
I mean, I only have this problem when you are "clarifying".
It's probably the stories you tell.
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
I wouldn't use syntax in that context.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:25 amAll formalisms are geometric. It's all syntax.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:16 amYou don't think general relativity is "effectively a gemoetric reationship between mass and distance"?
Well, he took the mathematical Minkowski space and re-imagined it as a malleable substance which is warped by matter.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:25 amAnd here I thought he based it on a Minkowsky space.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:16 amAs it happens, Einstein based GR on a story about a malleable substance which is warped by matter
I suppose you could make that case if you limit knowledge to propositional knowledge, but it seems a perfectly legitimate use of know to me.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:25 amThat's a peculiar use of "know" given the limits of computer science are the limits of knowlede.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 8:16 am What they have shown is that there are limits they don't yet know how to get through.
I wouldn't use 'lie' in that context either.
Well, as always there are alternative explanations you might consider. It could be that, as above, we simply don't use words in the same contexts. It might also be the case that you are not as clever as you think you are, some combination thereof of something completely different.
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
You wouldn't. Any computer scientist would.
It's notation without connotation. All formalisms can be "explained" to a computer which will crunch the symbols and spit out the answers
with zero concern for "gravity" or "falling objects"
Seeme he left all that stuff out of the formalism...Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 9:36 am Well, he took the mathematical Minkowski space and re-imagined it as a malleable substance which is warped by matter.
I limit knowledge to informed guessing. As opposed to uninformed guessing.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 9:36 am I suppose you could make that case if you limit knowledge to propositional knowledge, but it seems a perfectly legitimate use of know to me.
It's an informed guess that the number of grains in the universe is either odd or even.
It's an uninformed guess that it's even.
Misrepresenting the truth is always lying. You don't know the truth.
So you are always lying.
Anything's possible. Except the impossible.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 9:36 am Well, as always there are alternative explanations you might consider. It could be that, as above, we simply don't use words in the same contexts. It might also be the case that you are not as clever as you think you are, some combination thereof of something completely different.
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
I don't claim to know much truth, that's why I say philosophy is story telling. You call story telling lying, I don't.
Perhaps, but none of the above is impossible.Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 9:54 amAnything's possible. Except the impossible.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 9:36 am Well, as always there are alternative explanations you might consider. It could be that, as above, we simply don't use words in the same contexts. It might also be the case that you are not as clever as you think you are, some combination thereof of something completely different.
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
I don't call it lying. It's an euphemism for lying.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 10:10 amI don't claim to know much truth, that's why I say philosophy is story telling. You call story telling lying, I don't.
But hey, seems you've changed your mind now... apparently you know parts of the truth.
None that you know of anyway.
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
There where?Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 10:46 amNo. I have always said that the one thing that is definitely true is that there is consciousness. Congratulations Skepdick, you have bored me into submission.
Boredom is the logical conclusion of all philosophy. Evening questioning the questioners is boring. It's lame, formulaic and circular when done for its own sake. Even if you discover The Truth, and tell the Greatest Story Ever Told - then what happens?
It's meaningless unless contextualised.
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
Oh please. Are you really so autistic that you cannot interpret 'there' without reference to location?Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 10:48 amThere where?Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 10:46 amI have always said that the one thing that is definitely true is that there is consciousness. Congratulations Skepdick, you have bored me into submission.
It will still be underdetermined. Carry on, everyone.
Philosophy without context is logic, which I grant you is boring. It is in no small part what makes you boring.
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
Well, I am certainly less autistic than somebody who doesn't think there's a difference between "here is consciousness" and "there is consciousness".Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:41 pmOh please. Are you really so autistic that you cannot interpret 'there' without reference to location?Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 10:48 amThere where?Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2023 10:46 amI have always said that the one thing that is definitely true is that there is consciousness. Congratulations Skepdick, you have bored me into submission.
I can count, you see. Here makes one location. Here + there makes two locations.
And I don't know if there's consciousness but here is an interpreter. Refering to myself of course. Shout if you want to know more about mechanistic interpretability.
More or less under-determined than the previous story?
They teach you about calculus and integrals in philosopy, right?
Don't pin this on me. I've been poking you with a stick to contextualise philosophy for years.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:41 pm Philosophy without context is logic, which I grant you is boring. It is in no small part what makes you boring.
Why bother with story telling? There has to be a reason you are doing what you are doing. Surely?
-
- Posts: 635
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:17 pm
Re: Philosophy undermines truth
Main signs of autism:Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:49 pmWell, I am certainly less autistic than somebody who doesn't think there's a difference between "here is consciousness" and "there is consciousness".Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:41 pmOh please. Are you really so autistic that you cannot interpret 'there' without reference to location?
I can count, you see. Here makes one location. Here + there makes two locations.
Common signs of autism in adults include:
- taking things very literally
Still not getting it.
- finding it hard to understand what others are thinking
You don't need to specify "here is an interpreter". The less literal "there is an interpreter" is how people without your condition speak. We also understand that you are referring to you, and don't need telling in so literal a fashion.
All stories, hypotheses and theories are underdetermined. Some are much more plausible than others, some better supported, some more parsimonious, but it is very difficult to rule anything out completely.
This comes back to your inability to understand what other people are saying. The story telling part of philosophy is contextualising.Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:49 pmDon't pin this on me. I've been poking you with a stick to contextualise philosophy for years.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:41 pm Philosophy without context is logic, which I grant you is boring. It is in no small part what makes you boring.
I like stories.