Philosophy Now Forum

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:50 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:47 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:43 pm
I have seen what philosophers call “communication”.

Wiio’s laws apply...

Actually there's a lot of successful communication too, but that part went over your head.
It demonstrates your inability to properly process context, Mr. Communication Expert.

Weasel words.

Quantify it.

Should I read every topic on the forum and attempt to calculate an exact percentage?
You do it

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:50 pm I am talking about an active strategy (applied by both participants) for minimising miscommunication.

But since philosophy has no goals, I suppose minimising miscommunication is not something you care about...

Only a retard like you could possibly think that many of us aren't already doing that.

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:55 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:50 pm I am talking about an active strategy (applied by both participants) for minimising miscommunication.

But since philosophy has no goals, I suppose minimising miscommunication is not something you care about...

Only a retard like you could possibly think that many of us aren't already doing that.

I see.

So when you said “philosophy has no goals” you lied or mis-spoke?

Clearly philosophers (and thus philosophy) has at least one goal: to minimise miscommunication!

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:58 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:55 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:50 pm I am talking about an active strategy (applied by both participants) for minimising miscommunication.

But since philosophy has no goals, I suppose minimising miscommunication is not something you care about...

Only a retard like you could possibly think that many of us aren't already doing that.

I see.

So when you said “philosophy has no goals” you lied or mis-spoke?

Clearly philosophy as at least one goal: to minimise miscommunication!

That's not a "goal" idiot.

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:59 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:58 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:55 pm
Only a retard like you could possibly think that many of us aren't already doing that.

I see.

So when you said “philosophy has no goals” you lied or mis-spoke?

Clearly philosophy as at least one goal: to minimise miscommunication!

That's not a "goal" idiot.

So you aren’t optimising to reduce miscommunication?

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:00 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:59 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:58 pm
I see.

So when you said “philosophy has no goals” you lied or mis-spoke?

Clearly philosophy as at least one goal: to minimise miscommunication!

That's not a "goal" idiot.

So you aren’t optimising to reduce miscommunication?

When was the last time you talked to non-IT people ?

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:00 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:00 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:59 pm
That's not a "goal" idiot.

So you aren’t optimising to reduce miscommunication?

When was the last time you talked to non-IT people ?

Dude. Listen! You insist on classical logic, right?!?

By the law of excluded middle - I am asking you a valid question!

I am not in IT. I am in systems engineering.

Goal (noun): the object of a person's ambition or effort; an aim or desired result.

Two posts ago you said that you and many others are attempting (e.g exerting EFFORT while AIMING) to minimise miscommunication.

Therefore "minimising miscommunication" fits the Extensional definition ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension ... efinitions ) of a goal!

You also said that philosophy has no goals! While you clearly have a goal!

This is a performative contradiction! How am I supposed to interpret your meaning when you can’t even adhere to tour own rules?!?

Law of non-contradiction!

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:07 pm Goal (noun): the object of a person's ambition or effort; an aim or desired result.

Two posts ago you said that you and many others are attempting (e.g exerting EFFORT while AIMING) to minimise miscommunication.

Therefore "minimising miscommunication" fits the Extensional definition ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension ... efinitions ) of a goal!

You also said that philosophy has no goals! While you clearly have a goal!

This is a performative contradiction! How am I supposed to interpret your meaning?!?

Yes I'm optimising to reduce miscommunication. Which is best done by properly processing context, that's what you lack.
I'm not optimising much with you though, not worth the effort.
That's not a "goal" in itself, idiot.

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:08 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:07 pm Goal (noun): the object of a person's ambition or effort; an aim or desired result.

Two posts ago you said that you and many others are attempting (e.g exerting EFFORT while AIMING) to minimise miscommunication.

Therefore "minimising miscommunication" fits the Extensional definition ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension ... efinitions ) of a goal!

You also said that philosophy has no goals! While you clearly have a goal!

This is a performative contradiction! How am I supposed to interpret your meaning?!?

Yes I'm optimising to reduce miscommunication. Which is best done by properly processing context, that's what you lack.
I'm not optimising much with you though, not worth the effort.
That's not a "goal" in itself, idiot.

It fits the intentions and extensional definition of a “goal”.

But I guess your brain isn’t very good at drawing such parallels.

Either way you claim to insist on classical logic, but you seem to be rejecting all of its axioms!

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:13 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:08 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:07 pm Goal (noun): the object of a person's ambition or effort; an aim or desired result.

Two posts ago you said that you and many others are attempting (e.g exerting EFFORT while AIMING) to minimise miscommunication.

Therefore "minimising miscommunication" fits the Extensional definition ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extension ... efinitions ) of a goal!

You also said that philosophy has no goals! While you clearly have a goal!

This is a performative contradiction! How am I supposed to interpret your meaning?!?

Yes I'm optimising to reduce miscommunication. Which is best done by properly processing context, that's what you lack.
I'm not optimising much with you though, not worth the effort.
That's not a "goal" in itself, idiot.

It fits the intentions and extensional definition of a “goal”.

But I guess your brain isn’t very good at drawing such parallels.

Then using your legs to walk to the store is also a goal. It's optimising things, much better than crawling on all fours.

BECAUSE it fits the intensive and extensive definitions I am applying the law of identity and concluding that "aiming to minimise communication" is THE SAME AS as a "goal".

Therefore. By deduction - philosophers who attempt to minimise communication have a goal.

By the law of excluded middle philosophers who do not have a goal do not optimise to to minimise communication.

You also said that philosophy has no goals.

This is a contradiction!

You have pissed on the very thing you claim to embrace. Classical logic!

So do you care about classical logic or not?
You keep shifting the goalposts!

If philosophy has no goals then why are you attempting to minimise miscommunication?

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:21 pm BECAUSE it fits the intensive and extensive definitions I am applying the law of identity and concluding that "aiming to minimise communication" is THE SAME AS as a "goal".

Therefore. By deduction - philosophers who attempt to minimise communication have a goal.

By the law of excluded middle philosophers who do not have a goal do not optimise to to minimise communication.

You also said that philosophy has no goals.

This is a contradiction!

You have pissed on the very thing you claim to embrace. Classical logic!

No, it doesn't fit the definition of goal. You honestly fail to comprehend even the simplest English words.
Philosophy itself doesn't really have a goal. SOME philosophers make it their dedicated goal to improve communication. Some don't, they just improve it the same way you use your legs to walk to the store. Some don't even attempt to improve it.

Honestly this isn't about logic, you need a therapist.

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:24 pm

TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:21 pm BECAUSE it fits the intensive and extensive definitions I am applying the law of identity and concluding that "aiming to minimise communication" is THE SAME AS as a "goal".

Therefore. By deduction - philosophers who attempt to minimise communication have a goal.

By the law of excluded middle philosophers who do not have a goal do not optimise to to minimise communication.

You also said that philosophy has no goals.

This is a contradiction!

You have pissed on the very thing you claim to embrace. Classical logic!

No, it doesn't fit the definition of goal. You honestly fail to comprehend even the simplest English words.
Philosophy itself doesn't really have a goal. SOME philosophers make it their dedicated goal to improve communication. Some don't, they just improve it the same way you use your legs to walk to the store. Some don't even attempt to improve it.

Honestly this isn't about logic, you need a therapist.

So there is an authority on “philosophy itself”?
Can we ask them if philosophy has a goal?

“This isn’t about logic” he said. Using logic. Committing yet another performative contradiction.

Logic is language. Dumbass.

From Greek “logos”. The spoken word!