The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Not very magical, still... (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
Bill Hallahan
View Profile
Inner circle
New Hampshire
3222 Posts

Profile of Bill Hallahan
Yes, but, if you know I am Mr. Dunbar (how did you know? Smile ) the phrase, "I recognize I am being deceived" is not logically correct, it's just colloquial English usage. It is correct English, but it's not logical. English is not a logical language.

The logical usage is not, "I know I am being deceived," because of course you are "not being deceived," so technically you cannot "know you're deceived regarding some context" and simultaneously "know you are not deceived" regarding the same context.

The logical way to write "I know that I am being deceived," is to write "I know that I am not being deceived.

In effect, the phrase, "know I am deceived" really means "I know I am not deceived". Since the meaning isn't precisely what is written, it's just a word game.

For some word games, the meaning of only a single word changes.

It's like the old game:

I ask, "Which is better, a ham sandwich or complete happiness?"

The usual reply is, "complete happiness is better," to which I say,

"A ham sandwich is better. Nothing is better than complete happiness, and a ham sandwich is certainly better than nothing!"


See how the meaning of "nothing changed between the last two sentences. Again, if you say, "I know I am deceived" the meaning is, "I know I am not deceived." In effect, your example is pointing out a discrepancy in our language. There are many! We use context to determine meaning, and only rarely is there ambiguity.

P.S. My kindergarten teacher was Mrs. Dunbar!
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch"
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2010-06-04 16:24, Bill Hallahan wrote:
Quote:
8. If all truths are knowable, then all truths must in fact be known.

This is false for two reasons. In 1931, Kurt Godel, a mathematician, proved, among other things, that there are an infinite number of truths that can never be known. Even if that were not the case, that "all truths must be known" does not follow from "all truths can be known." Not everything that is possible happens. (Although, I suppose if one considers the universe to be totally deterministic, then anything that doesn't happen can't happen - in any event, Godel's theorem proves that there will always be unknown truths).

This somewhat overstates Gödel's (first) Incompleteness Theorem. What Gödel proved was that in a formal system powerful enough to perform number theory, there must be true statements that can be formulated in that system that cannot be proven in that system (using an algorithmic process to develop proofs, called an "effective procedure"); it doesn't say that those statements cannot be proven.

Nevertheless, the original statement is false.



Frankly, I'm surprised that nobody's taken exception to the original statements 4 & 5: they're contradictory.



Quote:
On 2010-06-04 17:20, foreva.infiniti wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-06-04 17:12, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-06-04 16:33, foreva.infiniti wrote:
If you're aware you're being deceived then in fact your not being deceived so no man or woman has the right to accuse anyone of deception.


I believe that this is incorrect.

Consider: You are out of the room while your friends A and B toss a coin, look at the result and then hide the coin.

A: "The coin came up Heads."
B:"The coin came up Tails."

You are aware that you are being deceived. Your awareness of this fact does nothing to resolve the deception. One of your friends is lying and both of your friends are working together to keep you from knowing where the deception lies. You can legitimately accuse your friends of deception, with no paradoxical result.

John

I'm aware that I'm being deceived but the deceiver is unbeknownst to me so I can't accurately make an accusation of deception without a deceiver to aim it at.

Your original statement was "If you're aware you're being deceived then in fact your [sic] not being deceived . . . ." It makes no reference to your ability to identify the deceiver. It's not true, as Magnus so eloquently illustrated.
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On 2010-06-04 17:30, S2000magician wrote:

Frankly, I'm surprised that nobody's taken exception to the original statements 4 & 5: they're contradictory.


I took as 4 trivially fallacious, and 5 as a conditional with a false antecedent.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27136 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
? what paradoxes?

Would you settle for "somewhat counterintuitive when thinking in base terms"?

hint: start with the basic meta-model questions 'how could one know if *' / 'when (or in what frame of reference) might a person believe that *' and apply to each clause in an assertion and then to the suggested superposition.

here's a non-paradox one can practice on: misdirection (<- you need a meta-model question of a type I did not use in this post for that one - googleltime Smile)

here's a paradox for you: magic trick?

here's another: shops full of people who say they are magicians yet do not practice magic nor when asked even believe in magic.

How would one know if a thing were a chicken?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
foreva.infiniti
View Profile
Regular user
6 Posts a + a 6 Posts =
116 Posts

Profile of foreva.infiniti
Quote:
On 2010-06-04 17:23, Bill Hallahan wrote:
P.S. My kindergarten teacher was Mrs. Dunbar!


I didn't think you'd remember...
Colors are Foreva. Numbers are Infinite. 4 every number there's a color. HEY! Eternity! Lets smoke a beer and drink some loud. But wait! I heard you was a six a plus a 6 ahhhh.
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2010-06-05 17:13, foreva.infiniti wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-06-04 17:30, S2000magician wrote:
You might try displaying a little maturity by admitting that you were wrong.


You might wanna realize that having an opinion that doesn't coincide with the popular opinion isn't a sign of immaturity. If your so mature then you'd realize that right and wrong is solely perspective. If your perspective doesn't match mine, that doesn't mean I'm immature it just mean I don't agree with you. Immaturity = someone who cant accept the fact that someone's opinion differs from theirs.

I'm more than happy to accept opinions that differ from mine. That isn't the subject of the sentence of mine you quoted.

You made a statement. Magnus demonstrated that your statement is, in fact (not in opinion; in fact), wrong. You argued with him by equivocating on your statement. It's fairly simple.

I never suggested that you're immature because you hold an opinion different from mine. I suggested that you're immature because your statement was demonstrated to be false and, rather than accept it graciously, you decided to argue.
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On 2010-06-05 17:13, foreva.infiniti wrote:
If your so mature then you'd realize that right and wrong is solely perspective.


Aha! This is almost a paradox. It is self-contradictory, but not quite paradoxical.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Why would anyone want to post with anyone using the name foreva? I mean, is this a rap board? How is Bill whatizname deceiving anyone? He is just not using his full name, if his name is dunbar who cares?

This is why I use my real name....
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
1. The peanut is neither a pea or a nut.

Q. What is a paradox?
A. Two piers.

Q. What is a paradigm?
A. 20 cents.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
EsnRedshirt
View Profile
Special user
Newark, CA
895 Posts

Profile of EsnRedshirt
Hmm, I'll cycle back to the original post and answer a few of these, because some of them have legitimate answers.
Quote:
3. What would happen if an unstoppable force hit an immovable object?
The immovable object would gain a hole.
Quote:
4. Since the universe is not infinitely old, it cannot be infinite in extent.
It isn't. But it's expanding at 74.2 ±3.6 kilometers/second/megaparsec, so just try and reach the edge.
Quote:
5. Why is the night sky black if there is an infinity of stars?
There's a lot of space dust out there- 80% of the material in the universe isn't visible or luminous, so that blocks much of the light from stars. Also, doppler shift will take light from stars out of the visible spectrum.
Quote:
7. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
The egg. Dinosaurs, which laid eggs, evolved into birds (including chickens.)
Quote:
8. If all truths are knowable, then all truths must in fact be known.
By whom?
Quote:
10. Diamond-water paradox (or paradox of value) Water is more useful than diamonds, yet is a lot cheaper.
Supply and demand.

I'd answer the rest but I'm really tired right now.
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.

* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt.
Dr. Van Van Mojo
View Profile
Special user
570 Posts

Profile of Dr. Van Van Mojo
Quote:
On 2010-06-04 11:22, foreva.infiniti wrote:
7. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Depends on whether you believe in evolution or creation.
foreva.infiniti
View Profile
Regular user
6 Posts a + a 6 Posts =
116 Posts

Profile of foreva.infiniti
Quote:
On 2010-06-05 21:29, S2000magician wrote:
I suggested that you're immature because your statement was demonstrated to be false and, rather than accept it graciously, you decided to argue.


Lets stick to your principle that those who continue to believe in something that is proven wrong are considered immature by your means. I'm going off topic but I'm still incorporating your principle.

Dinosaurs
Proven to have existed years ago. The existence and mass extinction of dinosaurs are omitted from a certain sacred book which reflects on the history of this world from the beginning to the end and dinosaurs are never mentioned. It's not like they could hide their existence from humans being carnivores like yourself. Those that read this book consider it the WHOLE truth. So what do you call those people? Immature?

Evolution
Theory of Evolution has enough evidence in support of evolution to convince 99.85% of America's earth and life scientists that the theory is valid. I don't believe in this theory but it has "evidence" which in turn equals "proof". I as well as millions of others don't accept this as fact whether or not it has been proven philosophically or physically. I'm so immature.
Colors are Foreva. Numbers are Infinite. 4 every number there's a color. HEY! Eternity! Lets smoke a beer and drink some loud. But wait! I heard you was a six a plus a 6 ahhhh.
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2010-06-06 14:15, foreva.infiniti wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-06-05 21:29, S2000magician wrote:
I suggested that you're immature because your statement was demonstrated to be false and, rather than accept it graciously, you decided to argue.


Lets stick to your principle that those who continue to believe in something that is proven wrong are considered immature by your means. I'm going off topic but I'm still incorporating your principle.

Dinosaurs
Proven to have existed years ago. The existence and mass extinction of dinosaurs are omitted from a certain sacred book which reflects on the history of this world from the beginning to the end and dinosaurs are never mentioned. It's not like they could hide their existence from humans being carnivores like yourself. Those that read this book consider it the WHOLE truth. So what do you call those people? Immature?

I'm a Christian; I read the Bible. (Any particular reason you didn't mention it by name?) I believe what's written in the Bible. I also realize that it was written at a time when people had, shall we say, a poorer understanding of science than we have now. Perhaps a discussion of dinosaurs was omitted because the author(s) considered it unimportant to the matters at hand.

Quote:
On 2010-06-06 14:15, foreva.infiniti wrote:
Evolution
Theory of Evolution has enough evidence in support of evolution to convince 99.85% of America's earth and life scientists that the theory is valid. I don't believe in this theory but it has "evidence" which in turn equals "proof". I as well as millions of others don't accept this as fact whether or not it has been proven philosophically or physically. I'm so immature.

There are varying degrees of proof. Magnus' example qualifies as mathematical proof, as compared to, say, legal proof. You use the word "evidence"; evidence is not the same as proof.

I hereby withdraw my suggestion that you demonstrate some maturity by admitting that your original statement was wrong; life's too short.
foreva.infiniti
View Profile
Regular user
6 Posts a + a 6 Posts =
116 Posts

Profile of foreva.infiniti
Quote:
On 2010-06-06 14:39, S2000magician wrote:
You use the word "evidence"; evidence is not the same as proof.


I'm glad you pointed that out because I did that subconsciously, referencing the law's definition of proof not webster's. Too much Judge Mathis I'll say.
Colors are Foreva. Numbers are Infinite. 4 every number there's a color. HEY! Eternity! Lets smoke a beer and drink some loud. But wait! I heard you was a six a plus a 6 ahhhh.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Durn skippy G.
foreva.infiniti
View Profile
Regular user
6 Posts a + a 6 Posts =
116 Posts

Profile of foreva.infiniti
Quote:
3. What would happen if an unstoppable force hit an immovable object?

The immovable object would gain a hole.


If the object is immovable then there wouldnt be a hole. For a hole to form molecules in the object in qustion would have to form a hole by... Moving!

Quote:
7. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
The egg. Dinosaurs, which laid eggs, evolved into birds (including chickens.)

Of course egg laying species predates the existance of chickens. To better understand its metaphorical meaning the question could be reformulated as which came first, X that can't come without Y, or Y that can't come without X?

My answer for 7 is (drum roll please): Neither ever came. -Epistemolgy
Colors are Foreva. Numbers are Infinite. 4 every number there's a color. HEY! Eternity! Lets smoke a beer and drink some loud. But wait! I heard you was a six a plus a 6 ahhhh.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27136 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
I'm still stumped by what it would mean for a set to contain itself as a proper subset.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2010-06-06 17:05, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
I'm still stumped by what it would mean for a set to contain itself as a proper subset.

As an example, the set of all things one can describe in fewer than 100 words is a thing one can describe in fewer than 100 words. (As here.)
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27136 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
I get stuck when asking myself "okay, if s is a proper subset of S, then S contains at least one element n which is not an element of s. Now what might that element n, be?

I looked up the "Russle Paradox" and was left with "can a set be a square?" which is a yes.

On the other hand asking "how would one know if a thing could be described in N words" without specifying the language, a test for specification and a verification process left me wondering about the game of charades - where one spouse looks at the other's face and guesses the movie correctly.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
How about the set S of all sets containing at least 10 elements?

The set S0 = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9} is in there.

The set S1 = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10} is in there.
.
.
.
The set S9 = {9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18} is in there.

Thus, S contains at least 10 elements, so S is in S.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Not very magical, still... (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.27 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL