The Law of Identity is Refuted by Time/Change

[Skepdick]

You tell me. You're te one who brought them in.

Are they sets or are they sequences?

They are {1,2} and {2,1}. Can't you fucking see them?

At face value they lack any abstract classification.

They are pixels on a screen! Each pixel identical to itself.
You cluster pixels together to identify them as "symbols"?
You extract meaning from these patterns?!?

Interesting.

Curly braces are used to denote sets, so I'm inclined to think that they are sets.

There is no denotation or connotation, dumb ass.

You are comparing real-world entities. Empirically.

And if they are sets, they are identical.

Do you identify them as sets?

YOU brought those entities into the discussion.

YOU tell us what they are.

Why do you need me to TELL you anything about them? Can't you fucking see them with your own eyes?

I am not identifying them as anything other than what they are. {1,2} and {2,1} are identical to themselves.

Irrespective of how you choose to classify them.

[Magnus Anderson]

You think ignoring a single property is the same as ignoring the rest of the universe?!?

You're asking stupid questions.

"Why are you ignoring the ordering?"

The reason I am ignoring it is because sets have no order. It's NOT something that constitutes sets. When comparing two things, I am not only free, I am also obliged, to ignore everything that does not constitute these two things.

And it's only natural to respond to a stupid question by asking an equally stupid question.

"Why are you ignoring anything at all? Why are you not comparing the entire universe to itself? Why are you ignoring rivers, mountains, trees, animals, humans, cities, countries, planets, etc? Why are you only focusing on 1 and 2?"

WE IGNORE THINGS BECASE WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THEM.

WE IGNORE THEM BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO THINK ABOUT THEM, TALK ABOUT THEM, MAP THEM, DESCRIBE THEM, COMPARE THEM, ETC

THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE THINK THEY DON'T EXIST OR THAT THEY ARE THE SAME AS EEVRY OTHER THING WE'RE IGNORING.

[Skepdick]

The reason I am ignoring it is because sets have no order. It's NOT something that constitutes sets.

Bullshit. Some sets have order. Some sets have no order.

Ordered sets have order.
Unordered sets have no order.

When comparing two things, I am not only free, I am also obliged, to ignore everything that does not constitute them.

Great! So why are you ignoring a property which constitutes some sets?

And it's only natural to respond to a stupid question by asking an equally stupid question.

Dude, you can't even discern simple properties like "ordering". You definitely don't have the competence to discern complex one - like "stupidity".

you are too stupid to be able to make the judgment.

WE IGNORE THINGS BECASE WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THEM.

OK, So what do you and don't you care about when you are selectively ignoring uniqueness identifiers?

WE IGNORE THEM BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO THINK ABOUT THEM, TALK ABOUT THEM, MAP THEM, DESCRIBE THEM, COMPARE THEM, ETC

THAT DOES NOT MEAN WE THINK THEY DON'T EXIST OR THAT THEY ARE THE SAME AS EEVRY OTHER IGNORED THING.

What it does mean is you've discarded the identity of the individual members of any collective. Just so you can talk about them collectively.

That's why you are asserting them as "same". You dumb cunt.

Now, why do you want to think and talk about them collectively - as being the same?
Why don't you want to think and talk about them individually - as being different?

[Magnus Anderson]

There is no denotation or connotation, dumb ass.

You are comparing real-world entities. Empirically.

You have to tell me what real world entities you're comparing, imbecile.

{ 1, 2 } and { 2, 1 } are symbols.

Are you comparing what these symbols represent?
If so, what is it that they represent?
Do they represent sets or do they represent sequences?

Or are you comparing the symbols themselves?
If so, are you comparing the strings of characters?
Or are you comparing the pixel grids?
And if you're comparing the pixel grids, are you merely comparing their colors, are you comparing the light waves that are emitted by the light diodes or are you comparing something else?

Don't be a retard.

[Magnus Anderson]

That's why you are asserting them as "same". You dumb ****.

And the reason you're asserting that they are different is because you discarded the rest of the universe. Just so you can talk about them individually. You dumb ****.

Now, why do you want to think and talk about them collectively - as being the same?
Why don't you want to think and talk about them individually - as being different?

You are asking stupid, irrelevant, questions, Skeppie.

[Skepdick]

You have to tell me what real world entities you're comparing, imbecile.

{ 1, 2 } and { 2, 1 } are symbols.

You cluster pixels together to identify them as "symbols"?
You extract meaning from these patterns?!?

Interesting.

Are you comparing what these symbols represent?
If so, what is it that they represent?
Do they represent sets or do they represent sequences?

What the fuck are you talking about? {1,2} and {2,1} are self-representing entities!

They are themselves!

Or are you comparing the symbols themselves?
Are you comparing the strings of characters?
Or are you comparing the pixel grids?
And if you're comparing the pixel grids, are you merely comparing their colors, are you comparing the light waves that are emitted by the light diodes?

I am comparing {1,2} itself with {2,1} itself !!!

What should I compare them as?
Should I compare them as symbols?
Should I compare them as strings?
Should I compare them as sets?
Should I compare them as clusters of pixels?

Don't be a retard.

There's only one person identical to a retard in this dialogue. And it's not me.

[Skepdick]

And the reason you're asserting that they are different is because you discarded the rest of the universe. Just so you can talk about them individually. You dumb ****.

Even if I take the whole universe into account {1,2} is still different to {2,1} you dumb cunt!

You are asking stupid, irrelevant, questions, Skeppie.

Relevant and irrelevant with respect to WHAT, you dumb cunt?

[Magnus Anderson]

What the fuck are you talking about? {1,2} and {2,1} are self-representing entities!

They are themselves!

I am surrounded by the entire universe, imbecile.

Which parts of it are you comparing?

Why are you avoiding answering the question?

I am comparing {1,2} and {2,1} !!!

What should I compare them as?
Should I compare them as symbols?
Should I compare them as strings?
Should I compare them as sets?
Should I compare them as clusters of pixels?

In other words, you have YET to choose what you're comparing.

[Magnus Anderson]

Even if I take the whole universe into account {1,2} is still different to {2,1} you dumb cunt!

Only because you're ignoring the rest of the universe.

If you take the whole universe into account, then you'd be comparing { 1, 2 } qua entire universe to { 2, 1 } qua entire universe. And from that perspective, they are not merely identical, they are actually one and the same thing. They are one and the same universe.

How do you like it when someone else plays your word games?

[Skepdick]

I am surrounded by the entire universe, imbecile.

Which parts of it are you comparing?

Why are you avoiding answering the question?

Are you fucking stupid, or yes?

I've made the parts explicit!

Part 1 of the universe: {1,2}
Part 2 of the universe: {2,1}

In other words, you have YET to choose what you're comparing.

Ok, so you are fucking stupid.

I have chosen already!

I've chosen part 1 of the universe: {1,2}
I've chosen part 2 of the universe: {2,1}

Compare them!

[Skepdick]

Only because you're ignoring the rest of the universe.

If you take the whole universe into account, then you'd be comparing { 1, 2 } qua entire universe to { 2, 1 } qua entire universe. And from that perspective, they are not merely identical, they are actually one and the same thing. They are one and the same universe.

Bullshit.

They are parts of the same universe, but they aren't identical parts of the same universe.

How do you like when someone else plays your own word games?

What word game you imbecile?

This is the cognitive process of identification at play!
This is how we identify and distinguish between different entities within the same universe!

[Magnus Anderson]

Are you fucking stupid, or yes?

I've made the parts explicit!

Part 1 of the universe: {1,2}
Part 2 of the universe: {2,1}

You have merely narrowed your options.

Narrowing your options is not the same as picking an option.

You really are a pathetic, shameless, clown.

[Skepdick]

Are you fucking stupid, or yes?

I've made the parts explicit!

Part 1 of the universe: {1,2}
Part 2 of the universe: {2,1}

You have merely narrowed your options.

Narrowing your options is not the same as picking an option.

You really are a pathetic, shameless, clown.

Are you fucking stupid; or yes?

I have possibly infinite options! I can compare any two things.
But I have made it explicit as to which two things I am comparing!
I have made it explicit as to which option I am exercising!

The option being: comparing {1,2} to {2,1} !!!

[Magnus Anderson]

Bullshit.

They are parts of the same universe, but they aren't identical parts of the same universe.

You can't compare two apples without first "cutting them from the flux".

You have to ignore everything else in the universe in order to be able to compare them and establish that they are different.

Otherwise, you have no choice but to conclude, "All is one."

It's the same exact idiotic kind of reasoning that you employ, it's just that you don't like it because . . . you don't like collectivism?

[Magnus Anderson]

I have possibly infinite options! I can compare any two things.
But I have made it explicit as to which two things I am comparing!
I have made it explicit as to which option I am exercising!

The option being: comparing {1,2} to {2,1} !!!

You haven't . . . and you have you to realize that you haven't. But it's going to take some time. Some seriously long time.