The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Most people claim to be "self-aware" yet their every behavior shows clearly that they are not.
In order to be "self-aware" one must be able to state clearly what they are, why they are. Aristotle learnt from Plato two important things, how to define a thing in the binary as "matter and form" and secondly, the distinction between the animate and inanimate. The inanimate, in of itself has no function, no will. It has no choices. The animate does. Aristotle put this distinction into a simple sentence: Every thing which has a function exists for that function.

Now here we have today, really stupid people who claim that one is a philosopher who asks such questions as What are we, why are we, what is our purpose, when If one cannot answer these questions, then what difference is there between the word Philosopher and idiot, or fool?

After slowly leading a person to the answer of those questions, for example, Alcibiades 1, people claiming to be philosophers, proven with paper printed testifying to it, they still insist, by their very words, the very products of their intelligence, to deny that they are still only a fool.

Now, it should be obvious to anyone capable of being self-aware, that we, as mind, have, as Plato noted, the job of maintaining and promoting life, i.e., we are potentially the most powerful life support system possible. We acquire that power, if we are ever to have a share it it, by information processing. It is the only job a mind can do.
As Plato pointed out, as the computer proves today, all information processing is achieved by binary recursion. Moron's, of course, not able to comprehend how this is done, can put their questions to their own computer, but instead vent their rage against their own stupidity by bothering other people with their ranting and raving.
So, as Plato pointed out, our job is learn information processing as applied to ourselves and our whole environment, which should actually be an obvious fact today, sadly, the fools greatly outnumber those who are above human simplicity.

Our job defines what the interests are of a self-aware person, a person who knows what they are and why they are and who have some level of demonstrating it. This is what the Bible points out, what Plato pointed out, what every experience we have points out, yet how does one account for the state of the world and humanity today measure up to that simple standard? It don't.
It therefore follows, A Man is hard to find.

How can anyone claim to be literate and self-aware today when as soon as they open their mouth they may as well be yelling, "Listen, I am an idiot, a fool, but I am special and important enough to talk." Really? everything around you is talking, speaking, expressing itself in binary, tell me first, what you have learnt in order for you to do your own work. For, after all, do we not do unto others as we have done for ourselves?

Unless a man be born again, he can in no wise see the Kingdom of Heaven, We are first born through a physical matrix, To be born again, we must, by biological fact, an intelligible Matrix, master our Grammar Matrix.
It is not difficult to prove to anyone capable of becoming self-aware.
The Perceptible and the Intelligible is a binary construct which defines the evolutionary state of every form of life.

There are three basic digital grammar systems in our Grammar Matrix, they are Common Grammar, Arithmetic, and Algebra.
There is one grammar system which can be written both ways, and combined, what has been traditionally been called Euclidean Geometry, but which should be called simply Geometry.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 12:52 pm how to define a thing in the binary as "matter and form"

If you actually had an education, you would know that the idea of "matter and form" was scientifically refuted a long time ago.

as the computer proves today, all information processing is achieved by binary recursion

Computers prove no such thing. The most consistent pattern I've observed on philosophy forums is that the nutters never have any idea how computers actually work.

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 3:04 pm If you actually had an education, you would know that the idea of "matter and form" was scientifically refuted a long time ago.

Really? Noun and Verb, limits and the material limits, were disproven by science?

Please direct everyone here to such a so-called scientific proof! I would like, myself, to be so entertained.

And, the founder of Formal Grammar, Plato, clearly stated that "the one and the many", i.e., noun and verb, is the work of a Dialectician, i.e., one who comprehends this binary distinction.

Show the world, who is feverishly putting all information into the computer, why it is that their efforts are futile, that there is some special class of information, which cannot be encoded and used to regulates the behavior of some special things. Share you awesome knowledge and do the world a favor!

If you were educated, you would be familiar with two, and only two types of identity, arithmetic and geometric, literal and metaphorical, particular and universal, etc,
So, also, if you would be so kind, tell us all, what other kind of identity you have discovered? Since, even that fact, tells you, as your own body does, that among those identities is one also called the perceptible and the intelligible.

Now, since there are two, and only two, types of identity, such as matter and form, tell me which science, which is now not a science, proved that it, itself, does not exist?

Try Charmides by Plato.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 5:28 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 3:04 pm If you actually had an education, you would know that the idea of "matter and form" was scientifically refuted a long time ago.

Really? Noun and Verb, limits and the material limits, were disproven by science?

Please direct everyone here to such a so-called scientific proof! I would like, myself, to be so entertained.

And, the founder of Formal Grammar, Plato, clearly stated that "the one and the many", i.e., noun and verb, is the work of a Dialectician, i.e., one who comprehends this binary distinction.

Show the world, who is feverishly putting all information into the computer, why it is that their efforts are futile, that there is some special class of information, which cannot be encoded and used to regulates the behavior of some special things. Share you awesome knowledge and do the world a favor!

If you were educated, you would be familiar with two, and only two types of identity, arithmetic and geometric, literal and metaphorical, particular and universal, etc,
So, also, if you would be so kind, tell us all, what other kind of identity you have discovered? Since, even that fact, tells you, as your own body does, that among those identities is one also called the perceptible and the intelligible.

Now, since there are two, and only two, types of identity, such as matter and form, tell me which science, which is now not a science, proved that it, itself, does not exist?

Try Charmides by Plato.

Your hand-waving about identity and information means nothing (I bet you don't know what "encoding information in a computer" means), referring to that lunatic dualist Plato means nothing. Plato was one of the most wrong humans in history. Nouns and verbs are irrelevant outside communication. You can't show a single example from science that is consistent with this ancient "matter and form" idea, there really is always just one thing that can't be split into matter and form. These things are so basic and obvious, one has to wonder how hard you hit your head really.

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 3:04 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 12:52 pm
as the computer proves today, all information processing is achieved by binary recursion

Computers prove no such thing. The most consistent pattern I've observed on philosophy forums is that the nutters never have any idea how computers actually work.

Computers work by using a series of switches with only two positions. Hence, binary.

Whether this proves anything is another matter.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:51 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 3:04 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 12:52 pm
as the computer proves today, all information processing is achieved by binary recursion

Computers prove no such thing. The most consistent pattern I've observed on philosophy forums is that the nutters never have any idea how computers actually work.

Computers work by using a series of switches with only two positions. Hence, binary.

Whether this proves anything is another matter.

Wrong, binary computers do that, not all computers.

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:56 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:51 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 3:04 pm
Computers prove no such thing. The most consistent pattern I've observed on philosophy forums is that the nutters never have any idea how computers actually work.

Computers work by using a series of switches with only two positions. Hence, binary.

Whether this proves anything is another matter.

Wrong, binary computers do that, not all computers.

As was alluded earlier, even so-called non-binary computers, ultimately depend on binary circuits of electricity, or electronics.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:15 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:56 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:51 pm

Computers work by using a series of switches with only two positions. Hence, binary.

Whether this proves anything is another matter.

Wrong, binary computers do that, not all computers.

As was alluded earlier, even so-called non-binary computers, ultimately depend on binary circuits of electricity, or electronics.

No they don't, Phil lied and you ate it up.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:15 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:56 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:51 pm

Computers work by using a series of switches with only two positions. Hence, binary.

Whether this proves anything is another matter.

Wrong, binary computers do that, not all computers.

As was alluded earlier, even so-called non-binary computers, ultimately depend on binary circuits of electricity, or electronics.

Actually, that is not entirely correct. Analog computers are designed to work single problems. A series of them was used to make the original Moog Synth. The way this was historically changed was by combining the attributes of both, by using sound fonts. i.e., sending the binary computer to specific groups of memory.
Now, the combination of both types of computing was not only suggested in the metaphors of the Bible, but also by Plato. That Grammar which pairs the motion of the hand to the intelligible definition of a thing. There is a one to one correspondence between the two elements of a thing and the motion of a hand. The complete fruition of so called Euclidean Geometry was made possible by the computer, and has become named today as Interactive Geometry.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:24 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:15 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 7:56 pm
Wrong, binary computers do that, not all computers.

As was alluded earlier, even so-called non-binary computers, ultimately depend on binary circuits of electricity, or electronics.

Actually, that is not entirely correct. Analog computers are designed to work single problems. A series of them was used to make the original Moog Synth. The way this was historically changed was by combining the attributes of both, by using sound fonts. i.e., sending the binary computer to specific groups of memory.
Now, the combination of both types of computing was not only suggested in the metaphors of the Bible, but also by Plato. That Grammar which pairs the motion of the hand to the intelligible definition of a thing. There is a one to one correspondence between the two elements of a thing and the motion of a hand. The complete fruition of so called Euclidean Geometry was made possible by the computer, and has become named today as Interactive Geometry.

Still not correct. Just because there were very few true ternary computers, doesn't mean they didn't exist.

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:42 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:24 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:15 pm
As was alluded earlier, even so-called non-binary computers, ultimately depend on binary circuits of electricity, or electronics.

Actually, that is not entirely correct. Analog computers are designed to work single problems. A series of them was used to make the original Moog Synth. The way this was historically changed was by combining the attributes of both, by using sound fonts. i.e., sending the binary computer to specific groups of memory.
Now, the combination of both types of computing was not only suggested in the metaphors of the Bible, but also by Plato. That Grammar which pairs the motion of the hand to the intelligible definition of a thing. There is a one to one correspondence between the two elements of a thing and the motion of a hand. The complete fruition of so called Euclidean Geometry was made possible by the computer, and has become named today as Interactive Geometry.

Still not correct. Just because there were very few true ternary computers, doesn't mean they didn't exist.

You seem to be exceptionally thick. I did not say anything did not exist, but I did say, there is again, two, and only two types, Digital and Analog. Now, the same applies to computing as stated by Aristotle and Plato,
We have one, or the other, or again, the combination of both.
A bit is either on or off, this is what is meant by binary. secondly, Terse computers are defined not in accordance with binary, but in accordance with base,
Learn the difference between base notation as a convention of grammar, and Binary, which allows you to choose your base system. Any current PC or everyone made, is designed to calculate in any base system you want, depending on its core processor, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc.

I once wrote a Word Macro, which allowed me to write a piece called Every Four Letter Word, It is posted on the Archive. The macro will do the same for any base binary. so that you can, if you have the time, write every name in the Alphabet, depending on how many letters are to be used.

This does not mean, I invented a difference kind of computer.

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:42 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:24 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:15 pm
As was alluded earlier, even so-called non-binary computers, ultimately depend on binary circuits of electricity, or electronics.

Actually, that is not entirely correct. Analog computers are designed to work single problems. A series of them was used to make the original Moog Synth. The way this was historically changed was by combining the attributes of both, by using sound fonts. i.e., sending the binary computer to specific groups of memory.
Now, the combination of both types of computing was not only suggested in the metaphors of the Bible, but also by Plato. That Grammar which pairs the motion of the hand to the intelligible definition of a thing. There is a one to one correspondence between the two elements of a thing and the motion of a hand. The complete fruition of so called Euclidean Geometry was made possible by the computer, and has become named today as Interactive Geometry.

Still not correct. Just because there were very few true ternary computers, doesn't mean they didn't exist.

By use of mathematical permutation, a ternary expression can be rewritten as 3 pairs. That is what is meant by a final decision—one that is reduced to a choice of two options.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:50 pm You seem to be exceptionally thick. I did not say anything did not exist, but I did say, there is again, two, and only two types, Digital and Analog. Now, the same applies to computing as stated by Aristotle and Plato,
We have one, or the other, or again, the combination of both.
A bit is either on or off, this is what is meant by binary. secondly, Terse computers are defined not in accordance with binary, but in accordance with base,
Learn the difference between base notation as a convention of grammar, and Binary, which allows you to choose your base system. Any current PC or everyone made, is designed to calculate in any base system you want, depending on its core processor, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc.

You said ternary computers start still as binary. So now you seem to be saying that binary means digital? No, binary doesn't mean digital. And no, a ternary bit isn't "either on or off", because it's ternary. And there is no magic in the analog vs digital distinction either which you just brought up, the digital signal can be seen as a special case of analog. What are you even on about?

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 9:07 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:42 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:24 pm

Actually, that is not entirely correct. Analog computers are designed to work single problems. A series of them was used to make the original Moog Synth. The way this was historically changed was by combining the attributes of both, by using sound fonts. i.e., sending the binary computer to specific groups of memory.
Now, the combination of both types of computing was not only suggested in the metaphors of the Bible, but also by Plato. That Grammar which pairs the motion of the hand to the intelligible definition of a thing. There is a one to one correspondence between the two elements of a thing and the motion of a hand. The complete fruition of so called Euclidean Geometry was made possible by the computer, and has become named today as Interactive Geometry.

Still not correct. Just because there were very few true ternary computers, doesn't mean they didn't exist.

By use of mathematical permutation, a ternary expression can be rewritten as 3 pairs. That is what is meant by a final decision—one that is reduced to a choice of two options.

What pairs? What are you talking about?

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 9:11 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 9:07 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Mar 15, 2025 8:42 pm
Still not correct. Just because there were very few true ternary computers, doesn't mean they didn't exist.

By use of mathematical permutation, a ternary expression can be rewritten as 3 pairs. That is what is meant by a final decision—one that is reduced to a choice of two options.

What pairs? What are you talking about?

Eg:

Ternary (1,2,3)
Binary (1,2) (1,3) (2,3)