Search

Ideas that are…

831 ideas match your query.:

Search ideas

#550 · Tom Nassis, 8 months ago

#549 · Tom Nassis, 8 months ago

I'll have to tap out sorry. Possibly talking on different trajectories.

If an OR gate is conceived as a computer then the initial post about the brain being conceived as a computer is a banality / an uninteresting syllogism.

#548 · Nick Willmott, 8 months ago · Criticized1 criticim(s)

Superseded by #546. This comment was generated automatically.

#547 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism

Well non-existence, by definition, can’t exist, right? Rules itself out.

#546 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · revision of #527 · Criticism

I’d like that.

And yes inexplicit criticism is good! And not taking infinite criticism is bad. Someone should make a list of understandable pitfalls one ought to avoid when trying to apply critical rationalism.

(Logan Chipkin)

#545 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago

Inexplicit criticism is good, maybe you can make it explicit someday and we can continue.

#544 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago

Yes, it should. I am left with no counterargument but a mild sense of dissatisfaction.

(Logan Chipkin)

#543 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago

To the question of existence.

#542 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism

You mean to the question of existence, or in general? Cuz in general I’d think of it as a criticism.

(Logan Chipkin)

#541 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)

Since you agree (#539) that logic is part of philosophy, the law of the excluded middle should satisfy you as a philosophical answer, no?

#540 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism

Yes (Logan Chipkin)

#539 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago

Is logic part of philosophy?

#538 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago

Good point - philosophy, then.

(Logan Chipkin)

#537 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)

Doesn’t physics presume the existence of physical objects and laws? Ie it presumes the existence of something physical. So it presumes existence itself. In which case physics can’t be the arbiter here.

#536 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism

I would think that the solution comes either from physics or from philosophy that comes out of some physical theory.

(Logan Chipkin)

#535 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)

That’s not a counterargument - so maybe that’s it, after all.

(Logan Chipkin)

#534 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism

I would be amazed if that is why there is something rather than nothing.

(Logan Chipkin)

#533 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)

If non-existence is to mean anything at all, I think that’s it, yes.

#532 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism Battle tested

Btw I do sometimes wonder if the problem of explaining why there’s something rather than nothing is connected to the fact that there’s a difference between Platonic reality and physical reality.

(Logan Chipkin)

#531 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago

Is non-existence really existing if there’s nothing at all?

(Logan Chipkin)

#530 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)

I don’t mean it as a word game, I mean it literally.

#529 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism

I think that’s just a word game.

(Logan Chipkin)

#528 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)

Well non-existence, by definition, can’t exist, right?

#527 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · CriticismCriticized1 criticim(s)

Superseded by #525. This comment was generated automatically.

#526 · Dennis HackethalOP, 8 months ago · Criticism