Philosophy Now Forum

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:35 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:34 pm you don't understand that language is inherently dualistic, but reality isn't, buddy

Monistic, dualistic, pluralistic or otherwise would still be adjectives.

And we've already established that you don't understand how those work.

sorry but I think it's beyond you to grasp what it means to point outside dualistic thinking

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:38 pm sorry but I think it's beyond you to grasp what it means to point outside dualistic thinking

And I think it's beyhond you to think.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:40 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:38 pm sorry but I think it's beyond you to grasp what it means to point outside dualistic thinking

And I think it's beyhond you to think.

boohoo

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:41 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:40 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:38 pm sorry but I think it's beyond you to grasp what it means to point outside dualistic thinking

And I think it's beyhond you to think.

boohoo

Cover your mouth when you cough.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:48 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:41 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:40 pm
And I think it's beyhond you to think.

boohoo

Cover your mouth when you cough.

seeking the logik of univalence takes timeee so much timeeeeeeeee

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:48 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:41 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:40 pm
And I think it's beyhond you to think.

boohoo

Cover your mouth when you cough.

How is your heroic fight against the Entropy Monster coming along? And that universal language thing or whatever you were working on, have you saved the world yet?

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:03 pm How is your heroic fight against the Entropy Monster coming along? And that universal language thing or whatever you were working on, have you saved the world yet?

I doubt you posess the mental capacity to grok negentropy and its significance to all life forms.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:06 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:03 pm How is your heroic fight against the Entropy Monster coming along? And that universal language thing or whatever you were working on, have you saved the world yet?

I doubt you posess the mental capacity to grok negentropy.

But can we save the world using only 1 bit of information? hmmmm
Well I'm sure you'll figure it out

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:07 pm But can we save the world using only 1 bit of information? hmmmm
Well I'm sure you'll figure it out

You don't even understand the difference between Shannon and Gibbs entropy...

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:08 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:07 pm But can we save the world using only 1 bit of information? hmmmm
Well I'm sure you'll figure it out

You don't even understand the difference between Shannon and Gibbs entropy...

which one can slay the Entropy Monster?

hurry up, we may only have a few billion years left

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:12 pm hurry up, we may only have a few billion years left

Experienced at what speed?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:13 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:12 pm hurry up, we may only have a few billion years left

Experienced at what speed?

timewasting speed?

Atla wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:17 pm timewasting speed?

You can waste time very slowly near a black hole...

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 7:21 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2023 5:00 am
On the contrary, as demonstrated above, the assumed mind-independent external world even if unprovable by science and unknowable by science, CANNOT and is impossible to be REAL [most FSK-ed real].

You've just repeated your argument again, what makes you think it would be more compelling the second time than it was the first time?

It is generally advised, one should repeat one's claim in the conclusion [preferably in different words].
Since I am lazy I often do not repeat the claim in different words; being boring is not critical.

And it's a huge logical leap to go from "science cannot prove it" to "it's impossible to be real". It's a big leap to go from "it's an assumption" to "it's impossible to be real". These absurd leaps on logic are why your op is getting roasted.

I am expecting irrational 'roasting' from p-realists.
Immature opponents will definitely 'roast' whatever is presented by the other party.

I had already presented the following argument;

• 1. What is most credible and real can ONLY [not scientism] be verified and justified via the human-based scientific FSR-FSK.
  2. Science itself acknowledge a mind-independent reality is unprovable within science itself, thus can only be an assumption. [references given]
  3. Therefore mind-independent reality as an assumption is impossible to be real.

Rather than repeat the arguments with the exact same words, try saying something new.

What is critical is the soundness of the argument, it is not about boringness.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 7:14 am

• 1. What is most credible and real can ONLY [not scientism] be verified and justified via the human-based scientific FSR-FSK.
  2. Science itself acknowledge a mind-independent reality is unprovable within science itself, thus can only be an assumption. [references given]
  3. Therefore mind-independent reality as an assumption is impossible to be real.

Then nothing is provable within science itself, can only be an assumption. Therefore nothing is possible to be real. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.