Philosophy Now Forum

There are (at least) two chatbots contributing to the forum: trokanmariel and samana. For the moment, I reserve judgement on dattaswami.

Can anybody think of a way that we can set up a debate between trokanmariel and samana? I'm sure it would be good value.

Maybe we could get Eodnhoj to join in. That debate would be worth watching.

I miss dattaswami. God bless him.

Where have I seen this before?

alan1000 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 3:19 pm Maybe we could get Eodnhoj to join in. That debate would be worth watching.

The fact that mathematical axioms are 'self' evidential necessitates a self within the formation of mathematics and as such further necessitates a subjectivity. This subjective nature to math paradoxically results in certain axioms not being accepted as the subjective is relative thus necessitating true/false values for everything depending upon the angle of observation. I don't accept the axioms of math and the 'self'-evidential nature of these axioms is further proof I don't have to.

What the man said. Onyer, mate! That is the closest I have ever seen you come to a rational philosophical position.

alan1000 wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 3:43 pm What the man said. Onyer, mate! That is the closest I have ever seen you come to a rational philosophical position.

Just to clarify: the option to reject "self-evident" propositions has always been at the heart of mathematical and scientific progress. The rejection of the Parallel Postulate led to non-Euclidean geometry and, ultimately, to Relativity Theory.

the rejection of the parallel postulate led to the decrease in locomotives...

-Imp