A question for deep thinkers and simple thinkers!
Forums › General Discussion › A question for deep thinkers and simple thinkers!-
bye🎵 wrote:
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Absosmurfly not. No law of man exists in reality.Brown, let me ask you a question here. Do you believe in the laws of logic?
I did not say there are no absolutes. I said the laws of logic are absolutely not absolute.
your trust and respect by now, then be gone with you. You parrot your idiot in a turfwars for
The laws of logic can be broken legitimately,
Ok since you affirm that these laws of logic do not exist then you will also affirm that they do exist.
If your assertion no longer has the order of non contradiction then you openly can not debate that you contrdict your own statement thus having to accept my view and also agreeing with everything I just said so far.
Insults don't scare me my friend, I've given you no names nor have I treated you as your treating me. It's a shame.
-
Info Warrior SP wrote:
Exactly. The law of non contrdiction keeps us from the 1984 theme of government.. We know what is right and what is wrong do teachers leave those kids alone!NEW WORLD ORDER
-
Mystery wrote:
The man just admitted that webye🎵 wrote:
To be fair brown, you're hardly an idiot; I'd say quite far from being an idiot.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Absosmurfly not. No law of man exists in reality.Brown, let me ask you a question here. Do you believe in the laws of logic?
I did not say there are no absolutes. I said the laws of logic cannot defend them against some idiot in a turfwars forum.
The laws of logic can be broken legitimately, and I have shown it to be true playing by your own rules. Is a photon a particle and not a particle?
Can contrdict each other and goes on about what he knows absolutely. In what reason should we now trust his reasoning? -
Maybe you should start by defining "law."
-
This comes down to logical fallacies and critical thinking.
It's not a matter of if they exist, but if they are valid, and yes - they are.
-
Bayani wrote:
If they are valid then the statement (which requires a mind) is true thus advocating their existance in reality. For example- a=a and not b.This comes down to logical fallacies and critical thinking.
It's not a matter of if they exist, but if they are valid, and yes - they are.
-
Mystery wrote:
Maybe you should start by defining "law."
Has anything I've said made any sense to you?
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
I've seen a lot of dancing around about "laws," to the point where it sounds like not everyone is even discussing the same thing. That's why I asked you to define the word, unless you're asserting that it can't be defined? If people don't even have a common sense of what you mean though, then the entire discussion is moot. People typically agree on some shared perceptions of reality in order to relate to each other.Mystery wrote:
Maybe you should start by defining "law."
Has anything I've said made any sense to you?
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Dude. I only pick on you because you are a bright and flashy know-it-all dumb ass.Mystery wrote:
Maybe you should start by defining "law."
Has anything I've said made any sense to you?
You are trying so hard to impress us all with your astounding logic and wit.
When you stand up in a room that has had 8000 attendants, in an MMORPG that requires a bit of mental disease to stake a claim within it... Prepare to be boarded!
This is not your class. Maybe find pupils at your local community college. I'm giving you this opportunity to disengage.
Otherwise, I'll have you chewing on your sneakers in a month.
EXCELSIOR!
-
(calling me irrational... can't trust my reasoning... Now I know for a FACT that you are just parroting some textbook. I am absolutely rational, and the only thing I have contradicted successfully is YOU. you don't take me seriously... you learn slowly.)
You've heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates?
MORONS.
Surely you didn't just put the poison in front of ME.
-
Logic is but a man made law and coception
-
The popo911 wrote:
So the laws are not man made.Logic is but a man made law and coception
-
Logic is a set of principles used to make valid inferences.
People can be "rational" but still succumb to the nuances of human cognitive biases.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
(calling me irrational... can't trust my reasoning... Now I know for a FACT that you are just parroting some textbook. I am absolutely rational, and the only thing I have contradicted successfully is YOU. you don't take me seriously... you learn slowly.)
You've heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates?
MORONS.
Surely you didn't just put the poison in front of ME.
Please don't be offended. Ok? -
Bayani wrote:
Then you would apply this to mean that people can be illogical but these laws stay the same? If so Then I would agree that while people can be inconsistent these laws stay the same. a=a in a million light years Away would still be true in any world or time frameLogic is a set of principles used to make valid inferences.
People can be "rational" but still succumb to the nuances of human cognitive biases.
-
YOU wrote:
If these laws are subject to man, then we have the issue of these laws changing thus taking away its absoluteness. That's a problem because if the law of non contradiction isnt absolute then I could raise any issue and no matter how hard you try, you would have no objection... Because contradictions are Now allowed in your worldview.The popo911 wrote:
So the laws are not man made.Logic is but a man made law and coception
-
bye🎵 wrote:
On what reason should you trust your reasoning to valid now? And how did you come to know anything without assuming it to be true before you concluded its validity?(calling me irrational... can't trust my reasoning... Now I know for a FACT that you are just parroting some textbook. I am absolutely rational, and the only thing I have contradicted successfully is YOU. you don't take me seriously... you learn slowly.)
You've heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates?
MORONS.
Surely you didn't just put the poison in front of ME.
-
If you experience nausea due to circular motion and have not taken your 💊, please do so now. 😜
💋
-
💋Karma💋 wrote:
Is circular reasoning absolutely wrong? Heheh ;)If you experience nausea due to circular motion and have not taken your 💊, please do so now. 😜
💋
-
bye🎵 wrote:
So is it ok to contradict everything you say? (going back to my last question). I think you like to go on in to red herrings so that it seems that your making sense relavent to my questions.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Dude. I only pick on you because you are a bright and flashy know-it-all dumb ass.Mystery wrote:
Maybe you should start by defining "law."
Has anything I've said made any sense to you?
You are trying so hard to impress us all with your astounding logic and wit.
When you stand up in a room that has had 8000 attendants, in an MMORPG that requires a disengage.
Otherwise, I'll have you chewing on your sneakers in a month.
EXCELSIOR!
-
Mystery wrote:
I understand. I have the question up. Do the "laws of logic" exist and are they absolute? I assumed anyone wanting to answer the question is looking up the laws of logic. I can't help if I'm talking about the laws of logic and the another talking about apples. Know what I mean? Of course if you would like for me to create a thread about the 3 laws then I could. Would that be better before asking the question?₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
I've seen a lot of dancing around about "laws," to the point where it sounds like not everyone is even discussing the same thing. That's why I asked you to define the word, unless you're asserting that though, then the entire discussionMystery wrote:
Maybe you should start by defining "law."
Has anything I've said made any sense to you?
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Circular definitions, circular reasoning. Everything in here is soooo circular we're going to have to start using some square pillows in our decorating. The kind with things on them that actually say something. My grandma has one, it says "It's Sunday, are you leaving yet?" True story as it happens...💋Karma💋 wrote:
Is circular reasoning absolutely wrong? Heheh ;)If you experience nausea due to circular motion and have not taken your 💊, please do so now. 😜
💋
💋
-
Child reads laws of logic. Assumes he must be genious, because everyone else must look them up.
Unable to use wit, simply fumbles as make-believe professor, in spite of abundant evidence of significant head density.
Randomly chooses from logic fallacy table to counter attacks and soldiers on, spewing more and more textbook vomit.
A photon is either mass, or energy. The photon is a particle and the photon is not a particle. The arbitrary second law is not universal.
Calls opponent circular, skips key observation that logical "laws" only apply to philosophical discussion, and break down in science.
Cat is dead and cat is alive, depending on which tangential universe is being observed.
Circular! Red Herring! Contradictory! Begging the question!
Move along junior. The secrets of the universe will not be solved here.
-
Mr brown why are you so angry? I ask you a question and then you go off in 8 directions. Please I'm not asking for much. Much less insults
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
What are you asking for exactly? You asked about the second law of logic. I debunked it. I'm waiting for you to give me something else to disprove, Stewie.Mr brown why are you so angry? I ask you a question and then you go off in 8 directions. Please I'm not asking for much. Much less insults
-
(pst... It only seems like everything is a red herring because you are unable to make basic inferences...)
-
bye🎵 wrote:
You didn't debunk anything, I explained to you that the cat theory gives two different senses when we are talking about "in the same sense" look up the law of non contrdiction.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
What are you asking for exactly? You asked about the second law of logic. I debunked it. I'm waiting for you to give me something else to disprove, Stewie.Mr brown why are you so angry? I ask you a question and then you go off in 8 directions. Please I'm not asking for much. Much less insults
My question was is it ok to contrdict everything you say?
-
bye🎵 wrote:
It seems that you really are trying hard to resist anything I have to say and call it idiotc.(pst... It only seems like everything is a red herring because you are unable to make basic inferences...)
-
(your framework requires valid proof, which we all know does not exist in reality. Only in artificial constraints on communication proposed by Aristotle. Mental masterbation, just accept it.)
-
bye🎵 wrote:
No because the laws of logic are immaterial and are transcendental. They are concepts that require a mind for its validity. I've been repeating this over and over again.(your framework requires valid proof, which we all know does not exist in reality. Only in artificial constraints on communication proposed by Aristotle. Mental masterbation, just accept it.)
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC