Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

[Atla]

Where did we ask any questions?

We had 4 propositions to write.
I wrote my propositions in Python.
You couldn’t write them on classical logic.

Couldn’t even do that...

You can't write such philosophical proopositions in Python. Only a complete idiot wouldn't realize that. Maybe in 30 years, when we have super advanced AI.

My expression in English on the other hand was well understandable (to people who can process logic).

You failed again as expected.

Fucking sophist.

What is the question to A=A => True ?

Aren’t you asking “Is A the same as A?”

What do you mean by “same” ?

Others understand how to interpret such questions, you don't. It isn't our fault that you can't understand English, or logic, or context.

[Logik]

You can't write such philosophical proopositions in Python. Only a complete idiot wouldn't realize that. Maybe in 30 years, when we have super advanced AI.

My expression in English on the other hand was well understandable (to people who can process logic).

You failed again as expected.

Fucking sophist.

What is the question to A=A => True ?

Aren’t you asking “Is A the same as A?”

What do you mean by “same” ?

Others understand how to interpret such questions, you don't. It isn't our fault that you can't understand English, or logic, or context.

The sophist tries his hardest to drag the discussion into the mud.

Did you not understand how to I nterpret these two English sentences?

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

You keep telling us your brain is equipped with this “feature”.....

Or did you have to “context switch” so you can interpret the meaning of “the same” in two different ways.

I guess one “same” is not the same as another “same”....

[Atla]

Fucking sophist.

What is the question to A=A => True ?

Aren’t you asking “Is A the same as A?”

What do you mean by “same” ?

Others understand how to interpret such questions, you don't. It isn't our fault that you can't understand English, or logic, or context.

The sophist tries his hardest to drag the discussion into the mud.

Did you not understand how to I nterpret these two English sentences?

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

You keep telling us your brain is equipped with this “feature”.....

Or did you have to “context switch” so you can interpret the meaning of “the same” in two different ways.

I guess one “same” is not the same as another “same”....

Don't pretend that your discussions are intellectual when you spew nonsense from start to finish. Playing the victim again?

Yes one proton is just like the next one. One Jane isn't just like the next one, because no two actual humans are 100% alike.

I think this is well understandable above age 4.

[Logik]

Others understand how to interpret such questions, you don't. It isn't our fault that you can't understand English, or logic, or context.

The sophist tries his hardest to drag the discussion into the mud.

Did you not understand how to I nterpret these two English sentences?

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

You keep telling us your brain is equipped with this “feature”.....

Or did you have to “context switch” so you can interpret the meaning of “the same” in two different ways.

I guess one “same” is not the same as another “same”....

Don't pretend that your discussions are intellectual when you spew nonsense from start to finish. Playing the victim again?

Yes one proton is just like the next one. One Jane isn't just like the next one, because no two actual humans are 100% alike.

I think this is well understandable above age 4.

Great!

You are above age 4 and your brain has the feature that mine doesn’t, so I need to help me out with please.

Can you tell me if this proposition is true or false?

“the same” is the same as “the same”.

[Atla]

The sophist tries his hardest to drag the discussion into the mud.

Did you not understand how to I nterpret these two English sentences?

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

You keep telling us your brain is equipped with this “feature”.....

Or did you have to “context switch” so you can interpret the meaning of “the same” in two different ways.

I guess one “same” is not the same as another “same”....

Don't pretend that your discussions are intellectual when you spew nonsense from start to finish. Playing the victim again?

Yes one proton is just like the next one. One Jane isn't just like the next one, because no two actual humans are 100% alike.

I think this is well understandable above age 4.

Great!

Then you can tell me if this proposition is true or false.

“the same” is the same as “the same”.

Nonsensical question, depends on how you interpret it.

[Logik]

Nonsensical question, depends on how you interpret it.

Interpret it in whatever way you interpreted it in the context of.

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

Is "the same" between the "Janes" the same (I think you will have to context switch here also) as "the same" between the photons?

Simple fucking proposition. Atla can't even determine if it's true or false!

Is "the same" the same as "the same"?

Use the feature in your brain that I don't have! Or is it a bug?

[Atla]

Nonsensical question, depends on how you interpret it.

Interpret it in whatever way you interpreted it in the context of.

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

Is "the same" between the "Janes" the same (I think you will have to context switch here also) as "the same" between the photons?

Simple fucking proposition. Atla can't even determine if it's true or false!

Is "the same" the same as "the same"?

Use the feature in your brain that I don't have! Or is it a bug?

No, of course not even two protons are the same, they are just alike.

What's your point?

[Logik]

Nonsensical question, depends on how you interpret it.

Interpret it in whatever way you interpreted it in the context of.

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

Is "the same" between the "Janes" the same (I think you will have to context switch here also) as "the same" between the photons?

Simple fucking proposition. Atla can't even determine if it's true or false!

Is "the same" the same as "the same"?

Use the feature in your brain that I don't have! Or is it a bug?

No, of course not even two protons are the same, they are just alike.

What's your point?

So in the context of reality TWO photons are NOT THE SAME.

But the law of identity states A = A => True ?!?!?!?!?!?

How many As are there? One or two? I see two, but my brain may have a missing feature...

Maybe I am supposed to interpret 2 as 1. I don't know?

[Atla]

Interpret it in whatever way you interpreted it in the context of.

One Jane is not the same as another Jane.
One photon is the same as another photon.

Is "the same" between the "Janes" the same (I think you will have to context switch here also) as "the same" between the photons?

Simple fucking proposition. Atla can't even determine if it's true or false!

Is "the same" the same as "the same"?

Use the feature in your brain that I don't have! Or is it a bug?

No, of course not even two protons are the same, they are just alike.

What's your point?

So in the context of reality TWO photons are NOT THE SAME.

The law of identity says: A = A => True

How many As are there? One or two? I see two, but my brain may have a missing feature...

Maybe I am supposed to interpret 2 as 1. I don't know?

In the context of reality, the law of identity is talking about A (photon1) and B (photon2), not A and A.

Still no point?

[Logik]

In the context of reality, the law of identity is talking about A (photon1) and B (photon2), not A and A.

Still no point?

Pay attention. On the screen in front of you, which I would imagine you agree is REAL! So when are are DOING logic we are still in the context of reality...

A = A

How many As do you see? 1 or 2?

Is the A on the left of the "=" the same as the "A" on the right?

Because that's fucking dualism staring you in the face!

[Atla]

In the context of reality, the law of identity is talking about A (photon1) and B (photon2), not A and A.

Still no point?

Pay attention. On the screen in front of you, which I would imagine you agree is REAL! So when are are DOING logic we are still in the context of reality...

A = A

How many As do you see? 1 or 2?

Is the A on the left of the "=" the same as the "A" on the right?

Because that's fucking dualism staring you in the face!

In the context of reality, they are not the same.

When they are interpreted as abstract symbols, they are interpreted as the same.

Still no point?

[Logik]

In the context of reality, they are not the same.

When they are interpreted as abstract symbols, they are interpreted as the same.

So in one context A = A is true?
In another context A = A is false?

Is "the same" the same as "the same"?

So if you interpret the above in the context of reality it's true, but if you interpret it abstractly it's false.

Fucking dualists everywhere!

[Atla]

In the context of reality, they are not the same.

When they are interpreted as abstract symbols, they are interpreted as the same.

So in one context A = A is true?
In another context A = A is false?

Is "the same" the same as "the same"?

So if you interpret the above in the context of reality it's true, but if you interpret it abstractly it's false.

Fucking dualists everywhere!

Of course in one sense, the abstract, it's true, and in another sense, the concrete, it's false.

What was the very first thing I told you (when you were still using the Timeseeker nick)?

I told you that you can't comprehend the concrete-abstract distinction (which is inherent to English btw) probably because of brain damage.

[Logik]

I told you that you can't comprehend the concrete-abstract distinction (which is inherent to English btw) probably because of brain damage.

I am perfectly aware of the concrete-abstract distinction.

What I am also perfectly aware of (and you aren't) is that if the abstract does not correspond to the concrete - that's....

What would you call it? The map diverging from the territory ?

You have a divergence in your very first axiom!

[Atla]

I told you that you can't comprehend the concrete-abstract distinction (which is inherent to English btw) probably because of brain damage.

I am perfectly aware of the concrete-abstract distinction.

What I am also perfectly aware of (and you aren't) is that if the abstract does not correspond to the concrete - that's an error.

Well now I've trained you enough about the abstract vs concrete that you seem to have some semblence of understanding about it. Very far from "perfect" though.

For example you think that I'm not aware that lack of correspondence is an error, something that anyone with half a brain knows.