Can Anything Truly Be Proven?

[chroot]

Originally posted by Gale17
HeavensWarFire, it'd be greatly appreciated if you could refrain from posting in this thread.

Don't worry, he'll refrain.

- Warren

 

[radagast]

Originally posted by Gale17
OOOOOOK...

Well HeavensWarFire... I guess you can say its because I'm a kid... though really i think its irrelevant. My "ill developed" mind is just unable to comprehend logic...

Right... so, i wasn't refuting logic, or denying it or anything like that. I just wanted to make some more sense of it. Again, i don't doubt logic at all... it works. But it just seems like... i dunno... shakey. I wasn't implying anything about religions at all... Though, now that i think of it... there's an interesting angle there. Would say, an omnipotent being have logic? or use logic or whatever?

But basically my only issue with like "proving things true" or what have you... is maybe actually the nature of axioms... It seems like so... human..? i don't know what I'm trying to say actually... but assure you it has nothing to do with my being some underdeveloped immature kid.

Gale, Perhaps this is something you've already understood, but I get the feeling you are uncomfortable with the need for the axiomatic, in logic.

It doesn't seem to make sense, at least to those of us that do not rely on faith, to accept something such as an axiom, as true.

The reason axioms are required by logic is that logic always starts at the known and proceeds, thru reasoning, to a conclusion. The problem is, no matter what you take as the starting point, it is required to be shown or proven, then what was used as the starting point of that reasoning has to be proven, ad-infinitum.

To avoid the absurdity of such an infinite recurse, an axiom or axioms have to be chosen.

Mentat,
You being 15 is quite a surprise. I'm know there are those two and three times your age, on this forum, that do not have the clarity of thought or maturity you do. You have a good head on your shoulders. Perhaps there is hope for the future [as I wave my cain from my front porch rocking chair].

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by radagast
Mentat,
You being 15 is quite a surprise. I'm know there are those two and three times your age, on this forum, that do not have the clarity of thought or maturity you do.

I agree entirely! Mentat, I suppose you're around on pf as much as you are because you get a lot of intellectual stimulation here that you don't get elsewhere? So maybe we here at pf are all helping to mold you into a terrible monst... er... a well-rounded intellectual. I'm curious, as a mentor and educator -- how much do you think you've gained from pf? Either way, remember us little people when you walk across that stage in Stockholm.

p.s. I remember Mentat's parents punished him once by limiting his access to pf!

- Warren

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by chroot
Some people hold that there are exactly three irrefutable statements:

1) I exist.
2) I am conscious.
3) Whatever exists has the characteristics that it has.

To refute any of these three statements, you'd first have to assume them true. If you say "I do not exist", who is speaking? If you say "I am not conscious", how can you speak? (Of anything?) If you say that a thing is not itself, then what are you speaking of?

- Warren

Thats pretty cool - hadn't seen them before.

p.s. I remember Mentat's parents punished him once by limiting his access to pf!

So... we're like TV and soda?

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by Gale17
OOOk... well...


Mentat... you do bring up quantum phyics and its nature to contradict things we thought we knew. Like that tv exaple. And i guess, that's sort of what I've been considering... Logic says there's a tv in our room... but there still may not be...

Well, quantum physics wouldn't deny that it is there, it just denies that it isn't there. IOW, the TV isn't either there or not, it's both. This doesn't really contradict logic, but it does contradict common sense, and requires an open-mind (and even then, it's rather inconceivable).

and with godel... So, logic can't justify itself? so, would that make this whole thread obsolete? i suppose i feel i need a little justification... but how else can i get that without logic? sooo, i dunno...

Godel showed (IIRC) that no logical system could be used to justify itself. But, to use some simple reasoning, instead of Godel, one can still see that using mathematics (for example) to justify that mathematics is complete is non-sensical since you must first assume that mathematics is right before using it to "prove" something.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by chroot
I agree entirely! Mentat, I suppose you're around on pf as much as you are because you get a lot of intellectual stimulation here that you don't get elsewhere? So maybe we here at pf are all helping to mold you into a terrible monst... er... a well-rounded intellectual. I'm curious, as a mentor and educator -- how much do you think you've gained from pf?

I've gained tremendously, IMO. Not only does this site provide intellectual stimulation, and lots of education on very difficult topics, it also provides lots of external resources so that I know what to read to learn more about what I'm interested in.

p.s. I remember Mentat's parents punished him once by limiting his access to pf!

- Warren

Yeah, now they know that this is the worst punishment they can possibly give me (except, perhaps, taking away reading altogether )...well, I've been a good kid at home ever since .

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by russ_watters
So... we're like TV and soda?

I don't drink soda and rarely watch TV...but, yeah, I guess you're right...this is my recreation, my fun.