Philosophy Now Forum

alpha wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Funny, but without sound logic at all. As I see that nothing is necessarily impossible, just often improbable, but not necessarily, given enough time and thus change.

one example of something impossible is two contradictory statements being true at the same time, and in the same respect. for instance: something being white and not white at the same time.

i know you're gonna try relativising this by saying stuff like: something can be relatively white and relatively yellow at the same time.

In fact things aren't white at all, they just have a specific texture that reflects all the frequencies of electromagnetic radiation that we are capable of sensing. So in essence they are both white and not white at the same time, as one considers both the perceived and the actual state of affairs, respectively.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:In fact things aren't white at all, they just have a specific texture that reflects all the frequencies of electromagnetic radiation that we are capable of sensing. So in essence they are both white and not white at the same time, as one considers both the perceived and the actual state of affairs, respectively.

i said in the same respect, that means we're talking about one respect at a time. so either the actual or the perceived, not comparing them against each other.

of course one might argue about the perceived being relative, but surely not the actual.

alpha wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:In fact things aren't white at all, they just have a specific texture that reflects all the frequencies of electromagnetic radiation that we are capable of sensing. So in essence they are both white and not white at the same time, as one considers both the perceived and the actual state of affairs, respectively.

i said in the same respect, that means we're talking about one respect at a time. so either the actual or the perceived, not comparing them against each other.

of course one might argue about the perceived being relative, but surely not the actual.

Yes, but 'actually' nothing is white, rather it's only 'perceived' as being white. Thus your statement was of perception, not of the actual.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:Yes, but 'actually' nothing is white, rather it's only 'perceived' as being white. Thus your statement was of perception, not of the actual.

if in fact nothing is white, then a thing still can't be actually white and not actually white at the same time. the argument stands.

alpha wrote:
I am afraid there are plenty of people on the planet who would at least dispute the absoluteness of 2 being the answer. I have debated
such individuals. One was saying we accept 1+1=2 until some scientist proves otherwise. As if this is subject to scientific experiments

Now mathematics relies on proof as it is a deductive discipline while science relies on evidence as it is an inductive discipline
Also mathematics is an abstraction whereas science only investigates observable phenomena. But if there are people on the
planet that dispute the answer to one plus one equals two they must be using a different number system to everyone else

alpha wrote:I am afraid there are plenty of people on the planet who would at least dispute the absoluteness of 2 being the answer. I have debated
such individuals. One was saying we accept 1+1=2 until some scientist proves otherwise. As if this is subject to scientific experiments

surreptitious57 wrote:Now mathematics relies on proof as it is a deductive discipline while science relies on evidence as it is an inductive discipline
Also mathematics is an abstraction whereas science only investigates observable phenomena. But if there are people on the
planet that dispute the answer to one plus one equals two they must be using a different number system to everyone else

you'd think that, but i'm afraid there are plenty of delusional people in the world. also, i didn't say the person with whom i debated, disputed that 1+1=2, she just didn't believe it to be a certainty. in other words, as far as we know 1+1=2, but we could be wrong. this kind of reasoning undermines all knowledge.

Well tell her that the equal sign is proof of the validity of every equation and also that mathematics is a deductive discipline
The only way that one and one could not equal two would be if they occupied different places on the horizontal number line

surreptitious57 wrote:Well tell her that the equal sign is proof of the validity of every equation and also that mathematics is a deductive discipline
The only way that one and one could not equal two would be if they occupied different places on the horizontal number line

trust me, some people don't get it, no matter what one says to them (and no matter how it's worded).