Lessons on Causality

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:47 am

gib wrote:And for what it's worth, I even have my own view of what really happened at the moment of the Big Bang. Like I said in an earlier post, I believe time merges with scale as one approaches the moment of the Big Bang. By "scale" I mean a dimension defined by "resolution," and by "resolution" I mean the size of the details a thing is composed of. So you could say a human being is one singular object at lower resolutions but a composite of billions of cells at a higher resolutions. Either way, it's the same human being; he (or she) hasn't changed in size. Likewise, you could consider the universe at many levels of resolution: trillions of elementary particles, as collections of atoms and molecules, as systems of ordinary human sized objects, as billions of planets and solar systems, as billions of galaxies, or as a singular whole we call "the universe". If you take the latter dimension and consider it a "5th dimension" (like Einstein considered time a "4th dimension") then you can give it the same treatment as Einsteinian relativity gives time and space (i.e. it can bend, warp, fuse, fission, etc.). Next step: picture a 2D graph where time is the horizontal axis and scale is the vertical axis. The "linear" assumption is that as you go back in time, scale does not change--it remains orthogonal to the temporal dimension--and likewise as you go up in scale, time does not change--it remains orthogonal to the dimension of scale. But my theory is that as you go further back in time, the graph should be drawn with the temporal axis merging up. And as you go up in scale, the graph should be drawn with the scale axis merging to the right. The axes meet at the point of the Big Bang. Time effectively becomes scale and scale effectively becomes time. What this means, essentially, is that there is something "special" about the singularity from which the Big Bang sprung, special in such a way that it wasn't just the "first" event to occur in time. Ultimately, the singularity from which the Big Bang sprung is a principle--the principle of existence itself--represented to us physically in its simplest form. The ensuing expansion of the universe is not so much a physical event, but a logical consequence of what this universal principle entails. It would be similar to saying that 1 entail .5 + .5 and that entails .25 + .25 + .25 + .25--an expansion that doesn't happen in time but "all at once"--like the whole being comprised of the parts all at once--something that can be graphed along the dimension of scale rather than time. So given all that, my take on the Big Bang and the "beginning" of time is such that there is no "first" event per se but that time slowly merges into scale as one approaches the Big Bang and therefore the very nature of time changes as one approaches the Big Bang. The "beginning" becomes more the "whole"--which is far less problematic as far as I'm concerned.

^ Again, just another picture, an alternative. Not gonna fight tooth and nail to "prove" it, but you asked and there it is.

All of that really seems nothing more than "something out of nothing", Ex Nihilo (ir)rationale.

From nothing, came something. Very Christian, theologically. That's really where your thoughts are based. It's obvious the connection between Big Bang Theory and Creationism, except that one is watered down and re-labeled with the seal of "Science!"

But relabeling doesn't mean that is what it is.


One of the main reasons, if not the main reason, I dispute your claim of a beginning of the universe, is because I know how people think. I know their logic, their rationales, the whys and hows. I know this because I've spent decades searching, seeking, challenging. When it comes to the bottom-line, when tested, people mostly boil their values and beliefs down to faith. They believe what they believe, mostly because they are indoctrinated to, passed down knowledge from sources that can be traced, and then they believe what they do based mostly on what they believe will be achieved from their beliefs.

So I ask you, and everybody else, why do you believe the universe has a beginning? Because that is what you were told as a child? Because "all things have a beginning?" (they don't...) And what are these "beginnings" you claim? That reminds me, of how I came to learn about Teleology. People believe in beginnings and endings because rationality very much requires concise and simplified methods of reducing generalities, and especially to reduce "the universe" to something comprehensive and understandable.

Thus a mere human stands in awe at existence, and because the mind is limited, must therein immediately apply its own limitation, as a projection, upon everything else.


A human limitation upon existence. "Because I begin, so too must existence." But this is not so. Because consciousness is not a beginning, nor is it an ending. Going to sleep is not a final end. Waking up is not a final beginning. Rather these are processes, and existence does not require consciousness, does not require your or my or anybody else's permission to exist. Existence is greater than human desire, control, and power.

So here is another point then. The weakling human, standing before the awe of the universe, wants to render, reduce, and wrap his arms around, all of existence. Humans want to build a wall around everything, so that, the mind can begin to understand it.

It is this compulsion, cognition, thought, pathology, that causes you and everybody else, to say "this is a beginning" and "that is an ending". Because without that notion of beginning and ending, you must be lost, correct? Better to find direction, to grab hold of floating driftwood, when out in the middle of the ocean? Because without that direction, what would humanity be doing then, except drifting aimlessly and without control?

Minds have a compulsion to gain direction in life. Without this (false sense of security) then yes, they can lose all their values, beliefs, faith, that they hold so dear.


You're on a philosophy forum. Start doubting, what you believe in. Start from the strongest foundation. So what then is your premise, your "beginning" to everything, except what I've already laid out?
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:24 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:So I ask you, and everybody else, why do you believe the universe has a beginning?

Why do you believe that circles have sides? You had to turn a blind eye to logic to excuse your claim.

Urwrongx1000 wrote:You're on a philosophy forum. Start doubting, what you believe in. Start from the strongest foundation.

That would be the very definitions of the words that you are using. 8)
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sun Oct 01, 2017 1:33 pm

James S Saint wrote:Why do you believe that circles have sides? You had to turn a blind eye to logic to excuse your claim.

Incorrect, what did I say?

Did I not say "as a shape approaches infinite sides it becomes a circle?"

Yes I did, logically sound and flawless. Your error was in not seeing subtlety, and admitting that a Chiliagon, for all intents and purposes, is a circle, despite having sides (unseen by human eyes).
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby WendyDarling » Sun Oct 01, 2017 1:43 pm

Circles have no sides. Circles are made up of points. A chiliagon is not a circle, rather the illusion of a circle as perceivable by the naked eye.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 6324
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:03 pm

All shapes have sides.

Here is James, Wendy, and Arc's argument:

Image


That's your "circle" compared to this:

Image


Should be obvious who the winner is here... (me!)
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby phyllo » Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:50 pm

Is the 'winner' the one who outlasts everyone?

And as a result he/she has the 'correct' philosophy?

:lol:
"Who loves not wine, woman and song, remains a fool his whole life long."

"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10110
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: ->.

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 3:28 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:
James S Saint wrote:Why do you believe that circles have sides? You had to turn a blind eye to logic to excuse your claim.

Incorrect, what did I say?

Did I not say "as a shape approaches infinite sides it becomes a circle?"

Yes I did, logically sound and flawless. Your error was in not seeing subtlety, and admitting that a Chiliagon, for all intents and purposes, is a circle, despite having sides (unseen by human eyes).

It's a good sign that you at least have enough sense to back off from what you actually said:
Urwrongx1000 wrote:A circle has infinite sides, and so Pi represents a derivative function of infinity, hence why it cannot be calculated.
Urwrongx1000 wrote:This is a circle James.
Image


But in your last post, you still missed the point.

Only a geometrically perfect circle is required to be a closed shape. The definition of a "circle" allows for open circles, but not for any straight sides at all, much less an infinity of them.

So UrStillWrong. :lol:
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 01, 2017 3:41 pm

WendyDarling wrote:Circles have no sides. Circles are made up of points. A chiliagon is not a circle, rather the illusion of a circle as perceivable by the naked eye.


When we say that a shape is a circle this is not because we tested every point on its boundary.
In fact, there is no such a thing.
You have some shape. Tell me, how many points are there on the boundary of that shape?

What we're doing instead is we are testing a number of points on its boundary.
And these are points of our own choice.
And if these points -- I call them key points -- pass the test, we simply declare that the shape is a circle.
That's what we do in PRACTICE.
No matter how many points you choose, you are always testing a finite number of points.

I don't care about what people SAY.
I only care about what people DO.

You and James and Arc and Gib and many others have it BACKWARDS.
You start with WORDS.
You have no direct contact with nature.
Instead, you all work with what is artificial i.e. man-made.
Such as for example words.
I have no respect for bookworms.

A chiliagon seen as a whole is not merely an illusion of a circle.
It IS a circle.

If a chiliagon seen as a whole is not a circle then what is?
What is a circle?
Don't just use words.
Show it to me.

But that's the problem, right?
You are one of those people who think that there are things that are beyond experience.
Things that you don't have to see.
Things that you only have to "understand".

Give me an example of a circle and tell me why you consider it a circle.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 3:49 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:When we say that a shape is a circle this is not because we tested every point on its boundary.

No, it is because we either assume it to be a circle, assume that the other person understands the shortcut issues of the language and doesn't care that it isn't a perfect circle, or that we intend that the shape is to represent a perfect circle even if it doesn't look exactly like one.

But at no time throughout history, has anyone of any education ever spoken of a shape with straight sides as being a "circle". Even in Newton's calculus, it was never said that the circle actually had infinite sides, but rather, only as URwrong recently stated;
Urwrongx1000 wrote:as a shape approaches infinite sides it becomes [more like] a circle
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:00 pm

assume that the other person understands the shortcut issues of the language and doesn't care that it isn't a perfect circle


Let's say that noone apart from retards such as for example you cares about perfect circles. There is no such a thing. It's merely an empty word.

or that we intend that the shape is to represent a perfect circle even if it doesn't look exactly like one.


But there is no such a thing as a perfect circle.
So it cannot be represented, approximated, etc.

The disease you are suffering from is Abrahamism i.e. you start with words and not with reality itself.

But at no time throughout history, has anyone of any education ever spoken of a shape with straight sides as being a "circle". Even in Newton's calculus, it was never said that the circle actually had infinite sides, but rather, only as URwrong recently stated.


It's irrelevant and you're wrong. Leibniz, among others, thought of circles as infinilateral polygons.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:26 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:Leibniz, among others, thought of circles as infinilateral polygons.

Really? You have a reference for that?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:57 pm

Perfect circles only exist as abstractions where the only requirement is logical consistency. Any circles that exist in reality are therefore imperfect even if they do
not appear to be so. Or are treated as if they were perfect like the perfect geometrical mathematical versions. And it is therefore very important to acknowledge
the two different types rather than assume only one type actually exists depending on ones subjective philosophical interpretation of what a circle is or should be
which is what every one is doing. Can no one see that the imperfect circles that exist in reality are approximations of the perfect circles that exist as abstractions
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:25 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:Perfect circles only exist as abstractions where the only requirement is logical consistency. Any circles that exist in reality are therefore imperfect even if they do
not appear to be so. Or are treated as if they were perfect like the perfect geometrical mathematical versions. And it is therefore very important to acknowledge
the two different types rather than assume only one type actually exists depending on ones subjective philosophical interpretation of what a circle is or should be
which is what every one is doing. Can no one see that the imperfect circles that exist in reality are approximations of the perfect circles that exist as abstractions

The only issue was whether they include straight sides. No physical object can ever have an infinity of straight sides (or actually any perfectly straight sides). There is no straightness in the physical universe. And in the conceptual universe, circles are precisely as they are defined, with no straight sides.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby WendyDarling » Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Points only, no sides of any kind. Geesh!
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 6324
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:48 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:Perfect circles only exist as abstractions where the only requirement is logical consistency. Any circles that exist in reality are therefore imperfect even if they do
not appear to be so. Or are treated as if they were perfect like the perfect geometrical mathematical versions. And it is therefore very important to acknowledge
the two different types rather than assume only one type actually exists depending on ones subjective philosophical interpretation of what a circle is or should be
which is what every one is doing. Can no one see that the imperfect circles that exist in reality are approximations of the perfect circles that exist as abstractions


My issue with you (and more or less everyone else in this thread) is that you think that the realm of the abstract and the realm of the concrete are two entirely different, separate, realms.

You think that it is perfectly fine when words have no reference to something real.
I don't. I think that when words have no reference to something real that they are quite simply without any meaning -- that they are meaningless.

You cannot represent or approximate something that quite simply does not exist.
You cannot represent or approximate perfect circles for the simple reason that perfect circles do not exist.

When we say that this or that shape is a circle we are NOT comparing that shape to some imaginary perfect circle.
Perfect circles cannot be imagined.
Why? Because it's a meaningless linguistic construct.
If taken literally. If not, then "perfect circle" simply refers to the most perfect circle among the circles we are aware of.

What exists are circles that are more or less perfect in relation to each other.
That's what exists.

Noone cares how consistent your thinking is if it does not correspond to something that is real.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:02 pm

Magnus Anderson wrote:I think that when words have no reference to something [physically] real that they are quite simply without any meaning -- that they are meaningless.

You cannot represent or approximate something that quite simply does not exist.
You cannot represent or approximate perfect circles for the simple reason that perfect circles do not exist.

Well, okay, prove that they have no meaning. But don't expect to succeed, because you are going to be wrong.

Magnus Anderson wrote:When we say that this or that shape is a circle we are NOT comparing that circle to some imaginary perfect circle.

Perhaps You aren't but "we" certainly are. That seems to be one of your language problems.

Magnus Anderson wrote:Perfect circles cannot be imagined.

Physically real circles cannot be imagined either. You can only image an approximation to anything, perfect or not.
Magnus Anderson wrote:it's a meaningless linguistic construct.

If it is so meaningless, why is it that everyone seems to understand it .. even you.

Magnus Anderson wrote:What exists are circles that are more or less perfect in relation to each other.

".. in relation to each other"???
I don't think so. A circle is considered MORE CIRCULAR IF it is closer to being the ideal, perfect circle. Physical circles are compared to ideal, perfect circles as a measure of the perfection. In architecture, when calculating the circumference of a column, the diameter is used to calculate the circumference of a perfect circle.

I'm sure that most people would agree that perfect physical circles do not exist. But you are saying that not even the idea of a perfect circle exists. And that is just silly.
Last edited by James S Saint on Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:07 pm

James wrote:
The only issue was whether they include straight sides. No physical object can ever have an infinity of straight sides [ or actually any perfectly straight sides ]
There is no straightness in the physical universe. And in the conceptual universe circles are precisely as they are defined with no straight sides

I agree with all this but it still seems very counter intuitive to not think of straightness existing in the Universe given how many everyday objects seem
to be absolutely flat with perfect sides and edges. But of course it is an illusion because at the quantum level those objects would not be perfect at all
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:10 pm

surreptitious75 wrote:of course it is an illusion because at the quantum level those objects would not be perfect at all

I don't believe in the ontology of quantumness, but in the ontologies involving infinitesimals, nothing could ever be infinitely flat or straight. Merely the issue of subatomic structure would prevent it.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:34 pm

JSS wrote:
Magnus wrote:I think that when words have no reference to something [physically] real that they are quite simply without any meaning -- that they are meaningless.


I didn't say "physically" for a very good reason. There is no need to. Dreams aren't physically real but they are nonetheless real. When your words refer to your dreams then they are meaningful.

Perhaps You aren't but "we" certainly are. That seems to be one of your language problems.


Noone is.

Physically real circles cannot be imagined either. You can only image an approximation to anything, perfect or not.


Real life circles can easily be imagined.

If it is so meaningless, why is it that everyone seems to understand it .. even you.


It is meaningless.

".. in relation to each other"???


Exactly. You have a circle A that has 64 points on its boundary that are equidistant from its center and you have a circle B that has 128 points on its boundary that are equidistant from its center. Circle B is thus more circular than circle A. Circularity is understood as a property of a shape that is measured by counting how many points on the boundary of the shape are equidistant from the center of the shape.

Circle B, although more circular than circle A, is not a perfect circle. And the two shapes are NOT compared to some perfect circle in order to determine which one of them is more circular. All we're doing is we're measuring the degree of their circularity and then comparing the results.

Think of it this way: when we're measuring the size of an object we are not doing so by comparing the object to some perfectly large object.

A circle is considered MORE CIRCULAR IF it is closer to being the ideal, perfect circle.


Yes. A man is considered TALLER if he's closer to being the ideally, perfectly tall man.

Physical circles are compared to ideal, perfect circles as a measure of the perfection.


Sure they are.
You cannot make comparisons unless there is an object that has perfect measurements.

I'm sure that most people would agree that perfect physical circles do not exist. But you are saying that not even the idea of a perfect circle exists. And that is just silly.


Words can exist. Simply by saying something like "askeqoieusdf" I make it come into existence. But does it refer to something? Of course it does not.
I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.
-- Mr. Reasonable
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:48 pm

Dreams are physically real. It is their implied content that isn't physically real. The content "exists" as concepts or ideas.

And it seems that you cannot prove the meaninglessness of a perfect circle. So you need to come up with a different argument.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby surreptitious75 » Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:02 pm

Anderson wrote:
surreptitious75 wrote:
Perfect circles only exist as abstractions where the only requirement is logical consistency. Any circles that exist in reality are therefore imperfect even if they do
not appear to be so. Or are treated as if they were perfect like the perfect geometrical mathematical versions. And it is therefore very important to acknowledge
the two different types rather than assume only one type actually exists depending on ones subjective philosophical interpretation of what a circle is or should be
which is what every one is doing. Can no one see that the imperfect circles that exist in reality are approximations of the perfect circles that exist as abstractions

My issue with you ( and more or less everyone else in this thread ) is that you think that the
realm of the abstract and the realm of the concrete are two entirely different separate realms
They are two entirely different separate realms which is why one is abstract and the other real

You think that it is perfectly fine when words have no reference to something real
I do think that it is perfectly fine since words do not always reference what is real

I think that when words have no reference to something real that they are quite simply without any meaning - that they are meaningless
Words themselves are not real but abstract signifiers we use to communicate with because all language is abstract including mathematics

You cannot represent or approximate something that quite simply does not exist
You can represent or approximate anything you can imagine that might not exist

You cannot represent or approximate perfect circles for the simple reason that perfect circles do not exist
I can though imagine a perfect circle and so the fact that they do not actually exist is therefore irrelevant

When we say that this or that shape is a circle we are NOT comparing that shape to some imaginary perfect circle
Real circles and abstract circles are obviously not the same but one is nevertheless an approximation of the other

Perfect circles cannot be imagined
Yes they can as I can imagine them

Because it is a meaningless linguistic construct
That can be imagined so invalidates your point

If taken literally
No not literally

If not then perfect circle simply refers to the most perfect circle among the circles we are aware of
There are no such things as perfect circles in reality rather the least imperfect that we are aware of

What exists are circles that are more or less perfect in relation to each other
More or less perfect in relation to each other makes them imperfect though

Thats what exists
Imperfect circles

No one cares how consistent your thinking is if it does not correspond to something that is real
Not all thinking though has to correspond to something that is real so this is demonstrably false

A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious75
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:43 pm

A circle doesn't have to be perfect, to be a circle. Flawed circles are circles too. Therefore, James, Arc, Wendy, you're all wrong.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:59 pm

Urwrongx1000 wrote:A circle doesn't have to be perfect, to be a circle. Flawed circles are circles too. Therefore, James, Arc, Wendy, you're all wrong.

As long as it doesn't have straight sides. Therefore, Urwrong .. UrWrong.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:00 am

A Chiliagon is a circle, therefore, circles have sides.
Urwrongx1000
Thinker
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Lessons on Causality

Postby James S Saint » Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:24 am

Webster's wrote:Chil´ia`gon
n. 1. A plane figure of a thousand angles and sides.
Online Dictionary wrote:chiliagon(Noun)
(rare) A polygon with a thousand vertices and a thousand edges.
    Origin: From Greek χιλιαγωνος, from χίλιοι ‘thousand’ + γωνία ‘angle’.
Definition-of wrote:Chiliagon
A shape with 1,000 sides.

I'm afraid they say nothing at all about it being a circle.
Association is not Identity.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25768
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users