If I can imagine it, it's logically possible?

Speakpigeon · Post by **Speakpigeon** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 4:23 pm

If I can imagine it, it's logically possible.
Test: square circle? No, I can't.
Test: The Earth is flat? Yes, I can.
Test: God? Well, I sure can imagine something, but I wouldn't say it looks like God. So, me, I can't.
OK, it's good to me, if I can imagine it, it's logically possible.
EB

PeteOlcott · Post by **PeteOlcott** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:34 pm

Heh, that is great you even used my same key counter-example. A square circle can be partially imagined until you get to the mutually exclusive attributes.

Logik · Post by **Logik** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:38 pm

Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 4:23 pm Test: square circle? No, I can't.

In 2 dimensions - impossible.
In 3 dimensions - trivial.

sqc.jpg

Perhaps what you are looking for is the concept of "realiazability".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realizability
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realization_(systems)

HexHammer · Post by **HexHammer** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:54 pm

Too many mix pure nonsense and babble grabbed out of a fairytale world, into their thesis and "solid proofs".

commonsense · Post by **commonsense** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:00 pm

Picasso can. Escher can. I can imagine illogical shapes; my favorite is a fork that has 3 tines and has 4 tines. I can envision examples of Magic Art.

Speakpigeon · Post by **Speakpigeon** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:05 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:00 pm Picasso can. Escher can.

Could you evidence that? From what I remember, they don't.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:00 pm I can imagine illogical shapes; my favorite is a fork that has 3 tines and has 4 tines.

Any way you could prove you can?

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:00 pm I can envision examples of Magic Art.

I'm not sure what is Magic Art and in the event how that would provide a ready counter-example...
EB

Speakpigeon · Post by **Speakpigeon** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:06 pm

HexHammer wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:54 pm Too many mix pure nonsense and babble grabbed out of a fairytale world, into their thesis and "solid proofs".

That's true enough. Still, you haven't replied to my question.
EB

Speakpigeon · Post by **Speakpigeon** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:09 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:38 pm
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 4:23 pm Test: square circle? No, I can't.
In 2 dimensions - impossible.

Good, we agree for once.
Still, maybe a square circle is a logical possibility.
EB

Speakpigeon · Post by **Speakpigeon** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:15 pm

PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:34 pm Heh, that is great you even used my same key counter-example. A square circle can be partially imagined until you get to the mutually exclusive attributes.

Well, no surprise here, it's possibly the most famous case of assumed logical impossibility...
And this shows an infinite past with a beginning is logically possible even though that doesn't help with the ordinary notion of an infinite past without a beginning.
EB

Speakpigeon · Post by **Speakpigeon** » Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:19 pm

Logik wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:38 pm sqc.jpg

Nice picture, but irrelevant.
And, notice that there is a projection of a circle which is indeed a square (and vice versa).
So?
EB

Scott Mayers · Post by **Scott Mayers** » Sun Mar 31, 2019 3:17 am

The Inventors: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley (preview of HBO doc)

...but ReasonTV's doc, Theranos, Elizabeth Holmes, and the Cult of Silicon Valley for a half-hour doc on Elizabeth Holmes,

...shows how some exploit the belief that one can always certainly create what is imagined first into reality. I do agree that anything we can imagine is logically possible but only with respect to how that possibility is actually imagined or to whether the imagined reality is only 'real' AS imagined but not able to be fulfilled, ....like this girl in the documentary. She is by far new except that she is one of the first women to have pulled her scheme long enough with such relative success.

Besides other business frauds like this, many presume that one is either just being negative when you poke holes in their dreams. But this is one of the biggest problems we face for NOT recognizing our limitations. How about the concept of being told that "there is always someone out there for everyone but they just have to keep trying." While the positive thinking permits us to not give up, the beliefs that get pushed upon us of these positive aphorisms can often do more harm in that they cannot be assured. For instance, is it appropriate to not give up trying to appeal to someone you like presuming that the onus is on your persistence? Many successful people offer this 'persistence' as to how they succeeded. But more likely, such people already have succeeded at some goal and have just retrospectively interpreted their trials as significant proof for all people.

So while we CAN make our imagined dreams logically possible, we have to be cautious of understanding the limitations.

Here is a good movie about a real 'dreamer' who tried to base his dreams on raising funds with this kind of thinking:
Tucker: The Manand his Dream if you guys want a good movie about this kind of thinking. It is more 'favorable' in light of how the movie presents Tucker's dream being crushed. But it shows us how we all can mislead ourselves into thinking this way as certain.

HexHammer · Post by **HexHammer** » Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:33 am

Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:06 pm That's true enough. Still, you haven't replied to my question.
EB

Why must I always waste time on self explanatory things.............

It's a really bad question only showing your lack of rationale, the question has no meaning and only a skitzo would ask such blatant nonsense!

-1- · Post by **-1-** » Sun Mar 31, 2019 6:50 am

Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 4:23 pm If I can imagine it, it's logically possible?

What do you mean, "logically possible"? Logic is a formal tool to show that if something is true, then something else is also true, given some circumstances and restrictions.

Logic has nothing to do with reality, although it can be applied to things in the real world; logic deals with propositions, with conclusions.

How can you imagine, for instance,

"All men are mortals.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore Socrates is mortal."

Are you sure you did not want to write,

"If I can imagine it, is it physically / empirically / metaphysically possible?"

-1- · Post by **-1-** » Sun Mar 31, 2019 6:52 am

Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:19 pm
Logik wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:38 pm sqc.jpg
Nice picture, but irrelevant.
And, notice that there is a projection of a circle which is indeed a square (and vice versa).
So?
EB

Circles are per definition two-dimensional. You can't invoke or imagine a three-dimensional circle. Not allowed.

-1- · Post by **-1-** » Sun Mar 31, 2019 6:55 am

Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:15 pm
PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:34 pm Heh, that is great you even used my same key counter-example. A square circle can be partially imagined until you get to the mutually exclusive attributes.
Well, no surprise here, it's possibly the most famous case of assumed logical impossibility...
And this shows an infinite past with a beginning is logically possible even though that doesn't help with the ordinary notion of an infinite past without a beginning.
EB

A square circle is not a logical impossibility. It is an impossibility due to the definitions of the circle and of the square, respectively. One is a circle, the other, one of the infinite amount of forms that are not a circle. Or, one is a square, the other, one of the infinite amount of forms of what are not squares.

Philosophy Now Forum