Philosophy Now Forum

My argument as to why axioms are the random variables that cause incongruency within and between dialogues. It is just an argument, take it for what it is.

A) All axioms manifest randomness through self-evidence as the self is undefined.

B) Axioms manifest definition through further axioms; therefore definition of an axiom is relative to the propagation of axioms.

C) All propagation is a continuum in definition of the beginning axiom(s), therefore all beginning definitions are in flux.

D) All axioms are propagative to stabilize self evidence, however all axioms are reflections of the self as an undefinable.

E) The increase in actual definition of axioms, through relations to other axioms, manifests further possible axioms.

F) A continual propagation of possible axioms, causes a propagation of definition in actual axioms.

G) All possible axioms are not actual axioms, therefore are deficient in structure. This deficiency in structure is congruent with randomness.
However, all possible axioms define all actual axioms.

H) A deficiency in structure defines axioms; therefore axioms are manifested because of unmeasurability.

I) All unmeasurability is self-evident.

J) All unmeasurables, as axioms, gain definition through relations. However all relations are dependent upon axioms.

H) Unmeasurability is unavoidable as unmeasurability is self-evident.

I) All self evidence is the manifestation of observation as measurement.

J) All measurement is an extension of the self; therefore is a reflection of the self.

K) All measurement relies upon an element of randomness; therefore no measurement is proportional in its entirety.

how was the randomness measured?

and are the measures of those random approximations to unattainable measurements exact?

-Imp

It is my view that you have no idea what an "axiom" is.
When you look up ad hominem, look up axiom too.

If you do understand what an axiom is then your entire post is gibberish.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:It is my view that you have no idea what an "axiom" is.
When you look up ad hominem, look up axiom too.

If you do understand what an axiom is then your entire post is gibberish.

"All axioms manifest randomness through self-evidence as the self is undefined"

Axioms are equal in definition to self evidence and can be viewed as structures or "particulate/particles of" observation.

NOUN

a statement or proposition that is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true:
"the axiom that supply equals demand"
synonyms: accepted truth · general truth · dictum · truism · principle · maxim · [more]
mathematics
a statement or proposition on which an abstractly defined structure is based.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:It is my view that you have no idea what an "axiom" is.
When you look up ad hominem, look up axiom too.

If you do understand what an axiom is then your entire post is gibberish.

"All axioms manifest randomness through self-evidence as the self is undefined"

Axioms are equal in definition to self evidence and can be viewed as structures or "particulate/particles of" observation.

NOUN

a statement or proposition that is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true:
"the axiom that supply equals demand"
synonyms: accepted truth · general truth · dictum · truism · principle · maxim · [more]
mathematics
a statement or proposition on which an abstractly defined structure is based.

They are not bloody random then are they?

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Eodnhoj7 wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:It is my view that you have no idea what an "axiom" is.
When you look up ad hominem, look up axiom too.

If you do understand what an axiom is then your entire post is gibberish.

"All axioms manifest randomness through self-evidence as the self is undefined"

Axioms are equal in definition to self evidence and can be viewed as structures or "particulate/particles of" observation.

NOUN

a statement or proposition that is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true:
"the axiom that supply equals demand"
synonyms: accepted truth · general truth · dictum · truism · principle · maxim · [more]
mathematics
a statement or proposition on which an abstractly defined structure is based.

They are not bloody random then are they?

All axioms manifest randomness through self-evidence as the self is undefined.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:My argument as to why axioms are the random variables that cause incongruency within and between dialogues. It is just an argument, take it for what it is.

I can't help but take it as an exercise in over complicating something to the point of making it incomprehensible.

Harbal wrote:

Eodnhoj7 wrote:My argument as to why axioms are the random variables that cause incongruency within and between dialogues. It is just an argument, take it for what it is.

I can't help but take it as an exercise in over complicating something to the point of making it incomprehensible.

I was also pointing out the reflective and propagative nature of axioms through argument. The propagation of a structure (or deficiency in one) that has a random element also propagates randomness also.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: I was also pointing out the reflective and propagative nature of axioms through argument. The propagation of a structure (or deficiency in one) that has a random element also propagates randomness also.

If this is an attempt to address my criticism then I'm afraid it has not been successful, in fact, you may have made it even worse.

Harbal wrote:

Eodnhoj7 wrote: I was also pointing out the reflective and propagative nature of axioms through argument. The propagation of a structure (or deficiency in one) that has a random element also propagates randomness also.

If this is an attempt to address my criticism then I'm afraid it has not been successful, in fact, you may have made it even worse.

1 reflecting against 1 is equal in definition to 2.

Reflectivity has propagative properties.

Axiom, as self evidence particulate observations, reflect against other axioms in an argument. From this reflectivity the definition of the argument is observed. However if axioms have a degree of randomness, then the randomness is also propagated. I don't understand your criticism, no disrespect.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:no disrespect.

Yes, I realise the disrespect is all on my part.

Harbal wrote:

Eodnhoj7 wrote:no disrespect.

Yes, I realise the disrespect is all on my part.

Chill...this is the internet...nobody understands what the other guy is saying half of the time.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:

Harbal wrote:

Eodnhoj7 wrote:no disrespect.

Yes, I realise the disrespect is all on my part.

Chill...this is the internet...nobody understands what the other guy is saying half of the time.

I mean it is not your fault.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: Chill...this is the internet...nobody understands what the other guy is saying half of the time.

If you knew me better you would know that this is me being chilled.

I mean it is not your fault.

I know it isn't.

Eodnhoj7 wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Eodnhoj7 wrote:

"All axioms manifest randomness through self-evidence as the self is undefined"

Axioms are equal in definition to self evidence and can be viewed as structures or "particulate/particles of" observation.

NOUN

a statement or proposition that is regarded as being established, accepted, or self-evidently true:
"the axiom that supply equals demand"
synonyms: accepted truth · general truth · dictum · truism · principle · maxim · [more]
mathematics
a statement or proposition on which an abstractly defined structure is based.

They are not bloody random then are they?

All axioms manifest randomness through self-evidence as the self is undefined.

Historically the ratio of randomness came to be removed from objectivity—the farther removed, the more completely objectivity was subjected to its axioms, and finally to the one axiom of identity. The pedantries of all systems, down to the architectonic complexities of Kant—and even of Hegel, despite the latter’s program. Consequently the open thought has no protection against the risk of decline into randomness; nothing assures it of a saturation with the matter that will suffice to surmount that risk. But the consistency of its performance, the density of its texture, helps the thought to hit the mark. There has been an about-face in the function of the concept of certainty in philosophy. Thus the assertive pedantry of the obscurantist is marked by the uncertainties of axiomatic function which thrusts trust in the sense experience in which axioms are wrought. In simple terms you are wrong.