Logik wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:46 am
Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:42 am
But you have concluded that I am irrational already.
I have done no such thing!
I did ask you if I am correct? But you neglected to add this in, and respond to that part.
I have concluded that I am rational. [/quote]
Did you use reason, or just deduced that without reason?
According to your own logic, you unfortunately can NOT justify this response.
Also, are you aware that just about ALL human beings conclude that that they, themselves, are rational?
A human trait is to LOOK AT the world and think/believe that what they SEE, conclude and deduce is rational, but "others" who do NOT conform/agree to one's own ideals, views, beliefs, et cetera, IS irrational.
So, you have concluded that the 'I' is rational, is that correct?
Logik wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:46 amThat does not mean that you are irrational.
The falsifiable hypothesis is that you are irrational.
You could falsify this theory and prove rationality by finding a way to agree.
To agree on what exactly?
I ALREADY KNOW a way to agree.
Surely a rational agent like you, especially one who is logik, would KNOW a way to agree.
Furthermore, if I agree with you that I am irrational, then does that mean I am rational, because we are two agents agreeing, or that I am irrational, because we are two agents agreeing?
Then that leads to; if you agree that I am irrational, because we are two agents agreeing, and so if I am irrational and you are agreeing with me, then are you irrational also. Because to agree with one who is irrational could be seen to be irrational also. This could then lead down one of those "black holes" that you were referring to earlier, which was also derived from one of those "theories" that you like to quote and use. And, if I am not mistaken, was it this same "theorem" also?
Logik wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:46 amAge wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:42 am
So, whoever the 'we' is that you are referring to, 'we' might have to, or already have, concluded that I am irrational.
On the balance of probabilities. Pending falsification.
Me? I am still at 50:50. You are either rational or you are irrational. I have no evidence either way.
That's what my coin said.
And, who/what is the 'we' that you say agrees with you?
Is the 'we' you AND A coin, or is it some thing else?