Is anything truly Ineffable?

[Stosh]

Doesnt anyone want to concede that self -in -consistency undermines a point ?

 

That abstracts like numbers and math are actually self consistent and therefore are

a basis that one can call true ?

 

All one has to really do to say a thing is true is to define the pespective the point is taken from.

 

It is true, that I think , that saying nothing is true, is self defeating mumbo jumbo.

 

Who should care if its universal or not?

Edited November 16, 2012 by Stosh

[Stosh]

Nothing is in-effable

I know folks that can eff anything up

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Stosh]

in part what's what I been pointing out: that "self -in -consistency undermines the point' ... its ' self defeating mumbo jumbo'...

I prefer self consistency supporting the point :-)

 

When some define what isn't true as being true and what is true as not being true stuff gets a bit complicated...

When someone who is wrong tells me I am right I have to wonder if they are recognizing what be right or what be wrong!

When someone who is right tells me I am right its much much more simpler...

 

Then ...Agreed !

Edited November 16, 2012 by Stosh

[GrandmasterP]

2+2=4

Agreed?

 

Wrong!

 

I was talking about halves, the correct answer is 2

[GrandmasterP]

Define your terms guys otherwise it's Bagua.

(Goes round in circles).

[Marblehead]

(Goes round in circles).

I do that oftentimes.

[Stosh]

2+2=4

Agreed?

 

Wrong!

 

I was talking about halves, the correct answer is 2

 

Wrong sir

If the unwritten X value is a half then the answer is still four X

Cmon, you can put up a better argument than that !

 

Have a nice weekend though all , Im outta here

[GrandmasterP]

Excellent.

:-)

 

Bed for me too. Zen archery class tomorrow morning.

Have a good one chums.

 

Edited November 16, 2012 by GrandmasterP

[Brian]

2+2=4

Agreed?

 

Wrong!

 

I was talking about halves, the correct answer is 2

 

Might wanna consider dropping the math analogies. In your graph vs. formula example, I find them both very illustrative but for different purposes, and for your "halves" example, your arithmetic is flawed. 1/2 + 1/2 = 2/2, or 2/2 + 2/2 = 4/2 or whatever but in no way I can see does 2 + 2 = 2 when "talking about halves."

 

Besides, give me a picture or verbal alternative to the shockingly powerful:

 

re^(iϴ)=r(cosϴ+isinϴ)

 

Many different languages to choose from, each with strengths, weaknesses and appropriate applications...

Edited November 16, 2012 by A Seeker

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

two halves plus two halves? equals two. wholes.

Edited November 16, 2012 by Hot Nirvana Judo Trend

[Brian]

You've switched units -- that's functional illiteracy.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

my literacy is healthy enough. But it's funny how you can tunnel through it by switching like that.

[Brian]

my literacy is healthy enough. But it's funny how you can tunnel through it by switching like that.

 

Pretty cool, huh? You can switch at will between the algebraic/exponential realm and the trigonometric realm, solve in whichever is more tractable and then switch back again if you wish! Takes a little gungfu but...

 

Edit: Or did you mean "switching units?"

Edited November 17, 2012 by A Seeker

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[gatito]

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[GrandmasterP]

Two halves make one. Two ones are two.

Don't believe me?

Ask Mrs. GrandmasterP.

:-)

Math'll only get you so far in Philosophy as Russell and Whitehead discovered to their chagrin.

Symbolic logic is yer man and old 'laugh a minute' Wittgenstein fair sickened his mentor Russell with that punch line in the Logico...

Whereof we cannot speak, thereof we must remain silent.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[GrandmasterP]

Ah that symbolic logic.

Nope the Philosophical app. It's not mathematical unless that is specified.

Specialist tool, find it in the journals.

The math heads don't like it at all as a rule cos it aint sums.

Edited November 17, 2012 by GrandmasterP

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Marblehead]

Two halves make one.

Not necessarily. If a person has one half of an apple and one half of an orange they do not have one orange or apple. They still have two halfs, no matter how you count them. But then, I suppose they could pretend they have one appange. And afterall, there is a lot of pretending here at Taobums.

Edited November 18, 2012 by Marblehead

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts