Author Topic: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...  (Read 796 times)

Offline Baruch (OP)

There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« on: June 10, 2017, 08:13:31 AM »
http://www.whatisitliketobeaphilosopher.com/#/graham-priest/

Bio on my new favorite living philosopher.  Take that Aristotle!  ... and Parmenides before him.
שלום

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2017, 04:10:46 PM »
The World War Era made for great philosophers.
"To have faith is to lose your mind and to win God."
-The Sickness unto Death - 1849

Offline Baruch (OP)

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2017, 07:33:48 PM »
The World War Era made for great philosophers.

Nothing concentrates the mind like ... "you are going to die now!"
שלום

Offline Hakurei Reimu

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2017, 08:07:58 PM »
Yes, I realized that you're on a paraconsistent logic bend a while ago, Baruch. Thing is, paraconsistency can't save you from the implications of the principle of explosion. It's just a matter of truth tables. A truth table analysis reveals that if p and p⊃q are both true, then the only truth value of q that makes sense is "true." Similarly, if p is false, then a truth table analysis reveals that p⊃q is true no matter what q is, therefore p⊃q is true for any q in the case that p is false. The trouble comes in when you consider p to be both true and false. It doesn't matter if paraconsistent logic says that there's no problem and the explosion doesn't occur, the problem is staring you straight in the face. There is a reason why the rules of valid logical argument have the form they do in classical logic.

Yes, the motivation behind paraconsistency is to resolve inconsistencies in a controlled way. I don't think that it does adequately because it still kind of leaves you in the lurch. Not only does it not really resolve the principle of explosion in a satisfying way, if you have to base an action on whether a particular implication is true or false, and those two choices are exclusive (if you try to, for instance, go to Panama and Canada at the same time, you're going to fail at least one of them), then you're sunk — you consider the critical statement both true and false, which leaves you no closer to resolving which action to take. It's much better to instead try to solve the inconsistency (resolve which of the cases actually matches reality), or work within a more powerful system that captures the uncertainty or vagueness presented in the inconsistencies, than to go to paraconsistent logics.

Oh, and another thing, the statements used in Godel's incompleteness theorem are NOT the same sort used in the liar paradox — they're very similar, but not the same. All such statements are of the form, "This statement is not provable in system S." It has a clear meaning independent of its truth, is therefore well-grounded (unlike the liar paradox, where the meaning of the liar statement, "This statement is false," is dependent on its truth value). That is the power of the theorem, that these statements, though self-referential, are nonetheless well-grounded in meaning — you know exactly what scenario is needed for the statements to be true or false, unlike with the liar paradox. Godel's theorems are not grounds for dialetheism, nor have I encountered any statement that would give it grounds. Every paradoxical statement used in support of dialetheism turns out to be a mere problem in semantics. This makes sense, because ultimately, what we operate on in logic is statements, not actual states of affairs.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Offline trdsf

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2017, 12:51:38 AM »
This is why in general, I have no use for philosophy.

Yes, there is such a thing as a contradiction.  I just contradicted you, so there is such a thing as a contradiction, QED.
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning." -- Calvin and Hobbes
"I thought I committed regicide today, but I committed deicide!" -- Sadie Doyle, Beyond Belief

Offline Baruch (OP)

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2017, 07:42:26 AM »
This is why in general, I have no use for philosophy.

Yes, there is such a thing as a contradiction.  I just contradicted you, so there is such a thing as a contradiction, QED.

You get it ... and one doesn't have to be technical about it to get it.  Hakurei is a shill for Aristotle (how Scholastic/Medieval is that).  Maybe the Deep Logic (like Deep State) folks have offered him free baklava for life?  QM itself doesn't support Aristotle (who's version of even regular logic has been obsolete for a century or more), but then Galileo proved long ago, that Aristotle was wrong about a lot of things.

Just putting up interesting stuff by actual professors ... not trying to make an argument from authority like some people we know.
שלום

Offline Draconic Aiur

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2017, 03:25:03 PM »
......Indeed?


"There is no such thing as a contradiction ..."

Offline aitm

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #7 on: June 11, 2017, 04:46:07 PM »
Philosophy recognizes the human as an animal, and strives to give them the goals of a god, but always understanding that the gods are animals as well. Simply...try to be better than your self through a series of entertaining but usually extremely verbose and mind numbing rambling which make little sense except for the few who understand the prattle.
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Offline Hakurei Reimu

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2017, 04:55:14 PM »
You get it ... and one doesn't have to be technical about it to get it.  Hakurei is a shill for Aristotle (how Scholastic/Medieval is that).  Maybe the Deep Logic (like Deep State) folks have offered him free baklava for life?  QM itself doesn't support Aristotle (who's version of even regular logic has been obsolete for a century or more), but then Galileo proved long ago, that Aristotle was wrong about a lot of things.
I guess someone doesn't realize that "contradiction" has two meanings.

Just putting up interesting stuff by actual professors ... not trying to make an argument from authority like some people we know.
A controversial professor, who doesn't necessarily speak for the mainstream. That actually is an argument from authority. And no, I gave my reasons for thinking that paraconsistency is simply making giving up sound respectable. That is the very opposite of an argument from authority.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2017, 04:56:56 PM by Hakurei Reimu »
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Offline Baruch (OP)

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2017, 10:52:45 PM »
"I guess someone doesn't realize that "contradiction" has two meanings." ... sounds like an inconsistency ;-)

Mainstream is White, Male, Anglophone, Straight etc ... you support that?
שלום

Offline Hakurei Reimu

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #10 on: June 12, 2017, 05:42:16 PM »
"I guess someone doesn't realize that "contradiction" has two meanings." ... sounds like an inconsistency ;-)
No, just an equivocation.

Mainstream is White, Male, Anglophone, Straight etc ... you support that?
What, you mean like Graham Priest? White, male, anglophone... maybe straight? He's certainly the other three, so you're at least three fourths the way there.

Anyway, you would have a lot more convincing case for paraconsistency if you can find a genuine case of dialetheism, that does not invoke a fallacy or a mistaken premise. I still wait for the time when it is presented. I also wait for an explanation of why paraconsistent logic is better than classical logic. In particular, why my explanation of why paraconsistent logic doesn't really avoid the principle of explosion in a satisfactory way is mistaken. C'mon. Lay it on me.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Offline Baruch (OP)

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2017, 06:23:24 PM »
Classical logic is fine, if you are living before George Boole.  I am surprised you don't believe in phlogiston ;-))
שלום

Offline Hakurei Reimu

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #12 on: June 12, 2017, 08:04:38 PM »
Trivially true, because classical logic is also fine after George Boole.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Offline Baruch (OP)

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #13 on: June 12, 2017, 11:26:02 PM »
Trivially true, because classical logic is also fine after George Boole.

What a maroon ... Bugs Bunny

I bet you are a Cretan, and all Cretans are liars ...
שלום

Re: There is no such thing as a contradiction ...
« Reply #14 on: June 13, 2017, 12:24:59 AM »
What a maroon ... Bugs Bunny

I bet you are a Cretan, and all Cretans are liars ...
Baruch---are you going through an especially rough time for you in the last couple of months?  I have seen a change in your responses; you seem to come to a point when your frustration with the posters on this site leads you to basically insult all who respond to you.  What your frustration is, I have not a clue.  I really hope whatever it is that seems to be bothering you clears up soon.  You are a person who I have greatly admired for your vast knowledge and your humor and ability to write.  Now you seem to just resort to insults--especially with obscure (at least to most of us) references to different types of thinking or philosophies.  .........you are a Cretan, and all Cretans are liars............?????  I don't get it.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?