A question for deep thinkers and simple thinkers!
Forums › General Discussion › A question for deep thinkers and simple thinkers!-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
And the photon?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:
Is a particle that makes up light, that behaves both like a particle and wave called particle wave duality₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
And the photon?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?
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Why on earth would it not be ok? Because this is a public discussion under the scrutiny of observers with a thing called common sense. You would be declared incorrect, discounted in shame, left to your textbook without concordance and with nobody to talk to.My question was is it ok to contrdict everything you say?
Do you wish to simply contradict everything I say?
"look, this isn't an argument!"
"Yes it is."
-
bye🎵 wrote:
I understand why you don't want to answer the question. It's ok. We'll move on.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
And the photon?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?
-
Killing Man wrote:
Right. It exists as two distinct properties in the same sense.bye🎵 wrote: And the photon?
Is a particle that makes up light, that behaves both like a particle and wave called particle wave dualitySounds like Aristotle wasn't up on quantumn mechanics.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Look up.bye🎵 wrote:
I understand why you don't want to answer the question. It's ok. We'll move on.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
And the photon?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?
-
Are you trying to trap me?
Futile.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
Ok since contredictions are ok in your worldveiw then you would have no objections that the laws of logic are absolute.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Why on earth would it not be ok? Because this is a public discussion under the scrutiny of observers with a thing called common sense. You would be declared incorrect, discounted in shame, left to your textbook without concordance and with nobody to talk to.My question was is it ok to contrdict everything you say?
Do you wish to simply contradict everything I say?
"look, this isn't an argument!"
"Yes it is."
-
It's silly that you think I'm reading a textbook... Well I could crack one up just for fun if you want.
-
Geometric line segment ab is twice the length of line segment cd. Are there more points on segment ab?
Every discipline in mathematics, logic, geometry, ANY construct framework, has its failures. They are not absolute, and not universal. Therefore, I refuse to take them seriously, and weasel out of them at will. And since proof does not exist, you can't effectively refute me.
It's language. It's art, not science. That is why you fail.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
So therefore your wrong and they are all absolute and you do affirm that they are.Geometric line segment ab is twice the length of line segment cd. Are there more points on segment ab?
Every discipline in mathematics, logic, geometry, ANY construct framework, has its failures. They are not absolute, and not universal. Therefore, I refuse to take them seriously, and weasel out of them at will. And since proof does not exist, you can't effectively refute me.
It's language. It's art, not science. That is why you fail.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Is any argument more self stimulating than this one? THIS is why logic is for dicks like you to play around with.bye🎵 wrote:
Ok since contredictions are ok in your worldveiw then you would have no objections that the laws of logic are absolute.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Why on earth would it not be ok? Because this is a public discussion under the scrutiny of observers with a thing called common sense. You would be declared incorrect, discounted in shame, left to your textbook without concordance and with nobody to talk to.My question was is it ok to contrdict everything you say?
Do you wish to simply contradict everything I say?
"look, this isn't an argument!"
"Yes it is."
Check your table of fallacies. You just committed one.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
False. Judges?bye🎵 wrote:
So therefore your wrong and they are all absolute and you do affirm that they are.Geometric line segment ab is twice the length of line segment cd. Are there more points on segment ab?
Every discipline in mathematics, logic, geometry, ANY construct framework, has its failures. They are not absolute, and not universal. Therefore, I refuse to take them seriously, and weasel out of them at will. And since proof does not exist, you can't effectively refute me.
It's language. It's art, not science. That is why you fail.
-
Mr. Brown fails to see his own error that has been made clear over and over again. He says that the law of non contrdiction absolutely isn't true yet doesn't understand that he is committing intellectual suicide and forcing his belief that we should rely on his ability to reason when he can not have any objections to anything because of his worldveiw that allows contrdictions... Funny thing is, he doesn't allow contrdictions thus debunking his entire system of arbitrary assertions.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
Simply asserting a fallacy doesnt prove it.You act as if ur defensive? Chill dude₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Is any argument more self stimulating than this one? THIS is why logic is for dicks like you to play around with.bye🎵 wrote:
Ok since contredictions are ok in your worldveiw then you would have no objections that the laws of logic are absolute.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Why on earth would it not be ok? Because this is a public discussion under the scrutiny of observers with concordance and with nobody to talk to.My question was is it ok to contrdict everything you say?
Do you wish to simply contradict everything I say?
"look, this isn't an argument!"
"Yes it is."
Check your table of fallacies. You just committed one.
-
I'm going to bed. Lol
-
Child... Truth exists. Logic does not always arrive there. Take a seat. Let me tell you about a universe without thought. It is pure, and absolute. It is the normal state of existence. As soon as a symbolic mind tries to interpret reality, it fails.
So people come up with non-symbolic frameworks to be taken as truth in order that we can apply our symbolic thought to absolute reality to SIMULATE truth and agree with one another.
It is not absolute, and not universal. It requires a symbolic mind to apply, and results may vary.
-
Contradiction possible != contradiction required.
So simple. Go to bed. Dream of stupid things.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Take two math classes and call me in the morning. Or physics. Your choice. Two segments of differing finite length each containing an infinite--or at least innumerable---number of points? I'd say he's up close n comfy with contradictory terms. It isn't arbitrary. It's geometry. I taught it to eighth graders. The physics? That I ran into in college and it wasn't well done in a book. Sorry. 😜Mr. Brown fails to see his own error that has been made clear over and over again. He says that the law of non contrdiction absolutely isn't true yet doesn't understand that he is committing intellectual suicide and forcing his belief that we should rely on his ability to reason when he can not have any objections to anything because of his worldveiw that allows contrdictions... Funny thing is, he doesn't allow contrdictions thus debunking his entire system of arbitrary assertions.
-
I'll throw my hat in this tomorrow it will take to long to read all of this now to catch up and brown now you know what it is like when I argue with mystery and Augustine vice versa
-
bye🎵 wrote:
And you have no objection that you also believe that the laws of logic are absolute and are universal. You just don't get it do you? Why should we all now accept the validity of your reason if all that you do is contridict yourself? All you have to offer is a viciously circular reason that we can't rely on logic to make conversation then demands us to make sense using logic. You are openly a irrational man. You seem incapable of reasoning. Wake up and wonder "oh I think I'll go turtle this morning". With out logic you couldn't even make a sentience here on this forum. Calling someone a child doesn't validate your reasoning either. If you call me out on something be ready to back it up.Child... Truth exists. Logic does not always arrive there. Take a seat. Let me tell you about a universe without thought. It is pure, and absolute. It reality, it fails.
So people come up with non-symbolic frameworks may vary.
-
💋Karma💋 wrote:
If you wanted to go into physics then this is the wrong forum because I am not a expert of physics and I doubt than anyone here is. We are talking about the laws of logic. And it's people here that are saying we must set aside logic to use of conversation which is rediculous because they don't do that when they make "truth clams" "I am tired", "a rock is hard" if these arent absolutely true then they become arbitrarily because truth now is irrelevant. If the law of mathematics also was not true then 1+1= 2 could not true either. If you want to argue paradoxes we can save that for a later thread.you have paradoxes when your dealing with absolutes₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Take two math classes and call me in comfy with contradictory terms. It isn't 😜Mr. Brown fails to see his own error that has been made his belief that we should rely on his ability to
-
We don't need the laws of logic here any more than Robert's Rules of Order.
There is no need to add arbitrary, dated, and inaccurate "laws" to our discussion. Modern discourse does not rely on it. Go join Mensa and fit right in. This is turfwars.
I yield the balance of my time, you bloated sack of protoplasm.
-
For someone that so boldly proclaims their mastery of logic, you commit an unusually high number of logical fallacies.
Even I, the lowly suicidal debater recognize that you struggle hard to understand the long list of fallacies, and don't have the mental capacity to avoid them.
-
If you are using logic to proclaim that I think contradiction is the norm.... I think you need to rethink your strategy. You are making logic look bad.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
You know wha the Robert's Rules of Order assumes? It assumes the laws of logic to conduct its conculsions. You can't make sense of yourself without first undergoing the absolute laws of logic. The laws of logic are derived from observable actions. You understand their conceptual nature and assume its validity before you even speak.We don't need the laws of logic here any more than Robert's Rules of Order.
There is no need to add arbitrary, dated, and inaccurate "laws" to our discussion. Modern discourse does not rely on it. Go join Mensa and fit right in. This is turfwars.
I yield the balance of my time, you bloated sack of protoplasm.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
No I think if we continue here the people will understand that you have self refuted yourself too many times to count. You use science but you know what science assumes? It assumes the law of identity where as you can come up with the scientific method.If you are using logic to proclaim that I think contradiction is the norm.... I think you need to rethink your strategy. You are making logic look bad.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
I've made no claim. And I don't like it when people lie about me. And assert fallacies without proving them. You are a lier and a deceiver. Everything I expected with someone who is illogicalFor someone that so boldly proclaims their mastery of logic, you commit an unusually high number of logical fallacies.
Even I, the lowly suicidal debater recognize that you struggle hard to understand the long list of fallacies, and don't have the mental capacity to avoid them.
-
bye🎵 wrote:
If we a sack of protoplasm then nothing you say matters to anyone not even yourself. So why are you trying so hard to prove your opinon?We don't need the laws of logic here any more than Robert's Rules of Order.
There is no need to add arbitrary, dated, and inaccurate "laws" to our discussion. Modern discourse does not rely on it. Go join Mensa and fit right in. This is turfwars.
I yield the balance of my time, you bloated sack of protoplasm.
-
Remember brown, there are no fallacies in your worldveiw, because to have a fallacy you have to undergo the laws of logic for it's catagory. And you believe that the laws of logic don't exist.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC