Dilemma of beginning of time

[Logik]

And now, suddenly, we shouldn't use logic to discuss the reality of the world? Should we just now shut up?

Yes. To speak of inifinities is not logical.

Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. --Wittgenstein

[surreptitious57]

Man made laws are false authorities when it comes to logic
Man made laws are only authorities when it comes to ethics / morality

Logic is objective and universally true : for example every one agrees that one and one is two
Morality is subjective and not universally true : for example not every one agrees that abortion is bad

Logic is therefore more reliable than morality because it is not as capable of subjective interpretation

[Logik]

Logic is objective and universally true : for example every one agrees that one and one is two

I don't.

1+1 = 10

[surreptitious57]

You agree with every one that one and one is two in base ten
That it is actually different for base two is obvious but trivial

[Logik]

You agree with every one that one and one is two in base ten
That it is actually different in base two is obvious but trivial

It's not trivial. It the ENTIRE point.

You are ASSUMING that everybody you meet defaults to base 10.
You are ASSUMING that the system (set of axioms!) in which people interpret the meanings of the symbols they use is consistent and universal.
It isn't!

And so when I SAY the word "10" and you SAY the word "10" we MEAN different things. This is the entire point why human communication fails all the damn time.

My intended meaning and your understood meaning diverge.

[surreptitious57]

Unless you are writing an algorithm / computer programme you use base ten like every one else
This is because the standard number system is base ten and so it is the universally accepted one

[Logik]

Unless you are writing an algorithm / computer programme you use base ten like every one else

In the most politest way possible. Kindly fuck off

You are not a mind reader. You have no insight into how my mind works, and you most definitely do not get to dictate how my mind SHOULD work.

I use base 2, 8 and 16 far more often than I use base 10. I think in logarithms and exponents.

This is because the standard number system is base ten and so it is the universally accepted one

I don't like your standard - it's not useful to me

[surreptitious57]

I use base 2 8 and I6 far more than I use base I0

Approximately what percentage of your time is spent doing this ?
Do you think in these bases when not actually writing algorithms ?

[Logik]

I use base 2 8 and I6 far more than I use base I0

Approximately what percentage of your time is spent doing this ?
Do you think in these bases when not actually writing algorithms ?

Approximately none of your business. I do it as and when I need to.

When I am problem-solving one of my strategies is divide&conquer. Reducing complexity/problem-space.
It works better in binary.

I know how to halve the problem space - I don't know how to tenth the problem-space.

[Atla]

Oh, whoa, it's you just claiming it's logically impossible that reality would include an infinite past. Isn't that an ontological claim?

No, it's a logical claim.

In other words, you are claiming the logical truth you think you know, i.e. that an infinite past is impossible, proves your ontological belief that reality doesn't include an infinite past.

I said that an infinite past may be possible, but would defy logic.
I absolutely didn't say what you claim.

And now, suddenly, we shouldn't use logic to discuss the reality of the world? Should we just now shut up?

I absolutely didn't say this either.

What's your deal? Your belief about logic being sort of inherent to the universe seems to be messing with your head..

[Atla]

I already asked you what would be the problem with the idea of an infinite linear time... No answer yet.
What would be illogical with the idea of an infinite linear time?

Of course it's illogical, that's obvious. The idea that time has an actual direction, that things can actually change at all, is perfectly illogical.

???
Again, what's illogical in that?
Merely repeating it's illogical doesn't make it illogical.
If you can't explain yourself beyond repeating it's illogical, then we'll leave it at that but you seem to have a lot of beliefs you're unable to justify.

And here we have infinite change. Does the past just disappear or what? Does the future not yet exist? Crazy ideas coming from everyday illusions.

???
The idea that you would have an infinite past doesn't imply that the past disappear, or for that matter that it doesn't. We don't seem to know either way, and this irrespective of whether the past is or isn't infinite.
Again, you have a lot of notions you don't seem capable of justifying and yet you think beliefs different from yours are crazy?!
Whoa.
EB

If you still don't get it then just forget about it. Even though it's obvious that actual change is illogical, a form of magical thinking, it's over your head. Because it is change, an everyday illusion but actually an impossibility.

[Logik]

Logic (and more precisely the Turing machine) is the foundation of thought. NOT the universe.

The structure of logic is the structure of your mind. NOT of the universe.

Any correspondence between the structure of the universe and the structure of your mind is the result of your mind interacting WITH the universe.

It's just modeling! We are constucting the map of the terrain as we go along. Knowing full well that IF the terrain changes tomorrow all our maps will be rendered obsolete, irrelevant and useless.

[surreptitious57]

The structure of logic is the structure of your mind NOT of the universe

Your mind is however not separate from the Universe
Your mind like everything else is part of the Universe

To treat them as entirely separate from each other is a false dichotomy

[Logik]

Your mind is however not separate from the Universe
Your mind like everything else is part of the Universe

To treat them as entirely separate from each other is a false dichotomy

Strawman. I am not treating them as separate.

My mind is a tiny spec of dust in proportion to the size and complexity of the universe.

To project this tiny mind onto the ENTIRE universe is hubris.

This perspective is lost on you because of language.

When you put the words "mind" and "universe" next to each other all notions of scale disappear.

[bahman]

I didn't claim an infinity of time didn't elapse. I said nobody had to wait for that time to elapse.
EB

Yes. There is no need to have somebody. Time has to pass whether there is something or not.