Does the universe allow for paradoxes?

Fliption

OK I see this as one area where misunderstanding can arise. I didn't see the difference between these 2 questions. Perhaps Mentat can clear up whether he thinks they are the same since it was his question?

If it is so obvious then why is Mentat asking the question? Are you sure you have the question right?


I have no negative attitude about paradoxes. If I have a negative attitude about anything, it is aimed at people who are so closed minded that they will not listen to anything people are saying. Their only response is that they are somehow the only person who can see the light and everyone else is just biased or an idiot. All of these are cop-outs when used in a philosphy forum. As much as I have tried to keep you on track by explaining to you exactly why I disagree, you always seem to head for the tredges of name calling. So what is showing through (if anything) is frustration with ignorance.

So you're going to throw away all knowledge and lessons learned from less complex areas of science and base your entire philosophy on a relatively ill understood theory like QM? It's ok with me. It is your opinion. Yep you have a bunghole too. lol

This paragraph describes what you are doing to a T!


Then by all means work on getting one.

wuliheron

Nope, I just go with the literal interpretation. If it's wrong, whoever started the thread can clarify it.

Maybe your own ignorance.

Wrong, I do not base my philosophy Quantum Mechanics, its just one of the more dramatic examples. As usual, your bias is showing again in your attempting to put words in my mouth.

Real questions do not demand answers, make accusations, inflamatory statements, or personal attacks. Sarcastic questions based on negative attitudes do. And yours is becoming more obvious by the post. Please stop now.

You don't have to like me personally or agree with what I have to say, but dogging my posts and harassing me is out of line. You did it in the last forum and it looks like you are intent on it again here.

There is a great deal more evidence than just QM to support my views, which are based on a widely respected philosophy with a tremendous number of scientific and technological applications. It also happens to be the basis of how half the world thinks and to be angry and negative at how half the world thinks is a sad state of affairs.

Deny it all you want, it is older than civilization and has survived better critics than you. It will undoubtly survive longer than your outdated views as well.

Fliption

Ouch. I've been insulted yet again simply for disagreeing.

I will admit that I am ignorant of exactly what your view is. Since the topic is actually not very complex it is a bit frustrating that we have to pretend it is.



All of this above is you doing the same thing you did in the last thread/forum that I tried to have an intelligent discussion with you. It results in you justifying the reason no one agrees with you by calling them biased and categorizing them into buckets like "mechanism" all with a disrespectful, arrogant tone. The whole time using ill disguised propaganda to try to turn it all around and make it look like it is the other person who is doing all of this disrespectful name calling! It is classic political BS and very obvious. No one with an open mind is going to read this crap and buy it guy. Why not just think about what I'm saying and then explain why you disagree. Continuing to sling the word "bias" around does nothing but make you look like you are dodging the tough issues. You use it because you think it gets to me and thats easier than actually have an intelligent on topic response. I know this personality type well. But I'm actually finding humorous all this dodging and name calling propaganda. Thank goodness for me it is so obvious so others can enjoy it too.

Now I fully expect you to totally avoid the paradox topic and once again try to make it seem as If I have insulted you totally unprovoked. Mentioning mentor action to police me would be no surprise at all. Even though any mentor can read this thread and see that you are extremely disrespectful and do not know how to use a philosophical discussion to your benefit.

Fliption

Yes sensei, this is how I interpreted the question that Mentat asked and I am certainly agreeing with your approach below to try to discuss this in a productive way. But if you read what has been posted above you will see that wuli doesn't even think thats what we're talking about. He thinks the question that Mentat asked means something else. I have no idea exactly what that question is but you can see that we can't even start where you have suggested below.

I agree with the overall tone of your post. I am curious myself where an open discussion on this might lead. I myself would love to have a clear concise argument in favor of paradoxes so that I can competently represent a minority view on this forum full of reductionist scientist. That is why I probe so throughly on wuli. I actually want him to succeed. But either my standards are higher than his or he just isn't very good at explaining his thoughts. Oh well.


Having said all of this, I'm going to leave it to you. I have learned not to "cast my pearls before swine" before. But sometimes my ambitious side forgets.

wuliheron

That's what the early Greek philosopher's thought about Zeno of Elias' paradoxes and philosophy. Simple.... right? Wrong! It took a millennia before anyone could mount a serious counter argument. As I keep saying, paradox is a slippery subject, obviously you have under-estimated it.

If you think it is impossible to have an intelligent conversation with me, just stop. Easy, isn't it?

Ancient Chinese saying,

"Don't listen to what people say, watch what they do."

Come to think of it, why do you persist after all this time if I have proven myself so thoroughly incapable of having an intelligent conversation?

"Don't listen to what people say, watch what they do."

That goes for ourselves as much as other people.

"Don't listen to what people say, watch what they do."

Fliption

It is simply a word that is being used several different ways because it is poorly defined. It doesn't have to be as complex as this.

I plan to. That's why I said to sensei that I'm leaving it to him to sort out. So my responses on paradoxes have stopped once I ,again, realised you are not capable of intellegent discussion.

Anything else I say will be to defend myself from obvious propganda meant to mislead. If you want to believe all the name calling 'bias' crap then tell it to yourself in the mirror. Because I'm not going to let you spout it off here without showing it for what it is.

I have watched and seen your motivation for what it truely is. Thats's why I choose to let Sensei takle over.

wuliheron

Now you are declaring yourself the unofficial moderator of this forum.

You are not making sense to me. First you declare you will not allow me to spout crap, then you say you are letting Sensei takle over. The only clear thing you have said here is that you think I am full of crap and have hidden motives.

"Don't listen to what people say, watch what they do."

Fliption

No, just defending myself.



I am letting sensei take over on paradox discussions because I know they are futile with you. When I say I will not allow you to spout the crap I am referring to insulting me personally, not paradoxes. This message was clear in my last post. But I am repeating it here once again to correct the on-going attempt to "obscure" what I'm saying.

Carry on Sensei

wuliheron

Well then, that was easy enough.

Mentat

I must say that I am shocked at the amount of personal attacks that people are making here. Kerrie can't censor everything, it's our responsibility to keep out conversations civil. Wu Li, would you mind not trying to make everyone who disagrees with you look like an idiot, it's backfiring. Fliption, I'm learning that, if something is hopeless, you should just leave it alone.

Mentat

I'd like to clear up the issue of my original question's meaning. I meant, "Can physical paradoxes actually occur?". Please forgive the misunderstandings I may have caused, but I (like Fliption) had not recognized the subtle difference between the two questions - "Does the universe allow for paradoxes?" and "Can physical paradoxes actually occur?".

wuliheron

I am not trying to make everyone who disagrees with me look like an idiot, nor for that matter do I care about people's perceptions of me. I am demonstrating quite effectively I believe that some people just won't leave well enough alone and simply cannot agree to disagree and leave it at that. As you admit yourself, you are learning if something is hopeless........

Existence itself seems like a likely candidate for a genuine physical paradox that applies to everything en toto, wholly irrational and ineffable. It may even be infinite in every way conceivable as you might prefer to say it. However, I tend to think we can find rational as well as paradoxical explanations for just about everything else. That's why explanations are so useful.

Mentat

You see? This is what you always do, and it really gets on my nerves [s(] . You talk about the paradox of existence as though it were proven, even in an argument about whether it exists or not. This is a perfect example of the kind of self-fulfilled reasoning that was the topic of my thread (in the old PFs), and that destroys all rational debate.

wuliheron

All I said was it seems like a likely candidate

Considering all the evidence, it does seem likely to me. The only evidence, I think, we are ever gonna have on the issue is statistical evidence like Quantum Mechanics which suggests the same possibility.

However, I will add that one interpretation of such "paradoxes" is that we are just staring at nature, and nature is staring back so to speak. Kind of like trying to use the "pickle" to define itself. Past a certain point you just find yourself going in circles.

Sorry, but the topic is paradox and nothing less than the entire universe. There is no other reasoning possible that I am aware of. If you can come up with a better way to talk about the subject be my guest.

Iacchus32

I think it does in the sense that it provides a means by which to contrast those things which appear contradictory in nature (which is really all I think wuliheron is getting at), other than that I don't believe so. Does it sound like I'm tyring to agree with everyone here? Oh my!

wuliheron

No, that's not all I'm trying to get at. Paradox can also be compared to what doesn't appear contradictory. One example is the concept of infinity in mathematics. Calculus does not actually address infinity itself, which is not a number, but merely approaches infinity and in the process of getting closer to the paradox puts it to useful work for us.

We can also approach other paradoxes as well both using logic and mathematics without actually touching upon the paradoxes themselves. Often what we are ignorant of proves even more useful than what we know.

One way to do this is to keep an open mind about what we think we know, such as the earth is flat, and look for paradoxical ways to view nature which can then be applied logically.

Mentat

I don't understand this. What do you mean by, a better way of talking about paradox? Do you mean the way that doesn't insist that there is in fact a paradox, without proof?