Philosophy Now Forum

Say you start drawing a circle. So you pick a point on the paper to start with and draw it until you complete the circle. Now the problem really begins because that starting point disappears after you complete the circle, as if it never had a starting point. But you may say that's no problem becuse you can claim that any point along the circumference can be the starting point. But that leads to the problem of infinity plus how can you say that the object has more than one starting point which is what you would be implying? What say you to this?

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Say you start drawing a circle. So you pick a point on the paper to start with and draw it until you complete the circle. Now the problem really begins because that starting point disappears after you complete the circle, as if it never had a starting point. But you may say that's no problem becuse you can claim that any point along the circumference can be the starting point. But that leads to the problem of infinity plus how can you say that the object has more than one starting point which is what you would be implying? What say you to this?

PhilX

I wouldn't say there is a problem of infinity in a completed circle; there is only a problem of ignorance if the starting point is not remembered.

Breath wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Say you start drawing a circle. So you pick a point on the paper to start with and draw it until you complete the circle. Now the problem really begins because that starting point disappears after you complete the circle, as if it never had a starting point. But you may say that's no problem becuse you can claim that any point along the circumference can be the starting point. But that leads to the problem of infinity plus how can you say that the object has more than one starting point which is what you would be implying? What say you to this?

PhilX

I wouldn't say there is a problem of infinity in a completed circle; there is only a problem of ignorance if the starting point is not remembered.

If you weren't the person who drew the circle and the starting point wasn't clearly marked, then how do you know there was a starting point? (and even if a point were so marked isn't proof of a starting point)

With respect to infinity, some believe in it and some don't. I do because when you arbitrarily select two distinct points along the circumference, you can always find another point along the circumference between them. How do you stand on infinity?

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Breath wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Say you start drawing a circle. So you pick a point on the paper to start with and draw it until you complete the circle. Now the problem really begins because that starting point disappears after you complete the circle, as if it never had a starting point. But you may say that's no problem becuse you can claim that any point along the circumference can be the starting point. But that leads to the problem of infinity plus how can you say that the object has more than one starting point which is what you would be implying? What say you to this?

PhilX

I wouldn't say there is a problem of infinity in a completed circle; there is only a problem of ignorance if the starting point is not remembered.

If you weren't the person who drew the circle and the starting point wasn't clearly marked, then how do you know there was a starting point? (and even if a point were so marked isn't proof of a starting point)

With respect to infinity, some believe in it and some don't. I do because when you arbitrarily select two distinct points along the circumference, you can always find another point along the circumference between them. How do you stand on infinity?

PhilX

Infinity is a negation of finity; negation is an act. One negates , or doesn't. I don't . Speculation about what isn't (negation of what is) is so delusional.