Can someone explain this? I really don't get it

File: 1312931501489.jpg (36KB, 500x310px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x310px

>>739767769
Have you tried taking drugs?

it's trying to say from different perspectives all opinions are true but that is retarded because there is only one truth

Alge, bra~.

>>739767769
blue is true. the other one makes the wall retarded

>>739767938

Tell us... tell us the one truth!

>>739767769
But you have to rotate the truth to make it fit the orange rectangular slot...

>>739767769
It means you're gay. Accept it

>>739767966
Alge bruh

>>739768139
No.... look again

File: Capture65.png (6KB, 573x471px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 573x471px

>>739767769
Here you go

>>739767769
The person who made this is retarded. If the item is a cylinder then the people claiming it is a square or a circle are both wrong.

>>739768269

*gasp*
>no-

>>739767769
the truth is objective and subjective
someones truth can be different from yours, you just see it differently but it doesn't make it any less true to them.

>>739767938
But I don't get the square... It can't fit in the square so how is it true? And this is not b8, I guess I'm legitimately a dumb ass.

a single true statement does not necessarily convey all information. If you cant understand this you are retarded.

>>739768554
A cylinder viewed from the side is a square.

>>739768712
actually its a rectangle, and the rectangle in the OP is oriented wrong

>>739768377
I get this but the one in the bottom right still makes the wall have gaps in it because the wall is flat and the cylinder is round on that side. This shows that while two truths may seem to be present there is only one upon closer inspection.

>>739767769
Truth is however you wanna spin it.

File: geb.jpg (80KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 960x540px

>>739767769
Dimensions collapse.

>>739768448
Truth is not subjective. Either something is true or it is false. Black and white. There is no grey area. Truth is absolute.

>>739768832
They probably didn't think the image through that well. Or they're pushing some secret absolutist propaganda, who knows.

File: dumass doesnt know what a cylinder is.png (13KB, 718x152px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 718x152px

>>739768554
i rendered your dumb ass a model
see how the left image is a rectangle

>>739767769
It's an extension of Plato's allegory of the cave, for two distinct illusionary observations of the reality that are in stark contrast to each other.

It's probably trying to make the point that two opposing point of views aren't necessarily contradictionary, and you should free your mind and look at the big picture instead of sticking to how things look to you.

>>739767769
It means that the truth can have different aspects to it and people typically focus only on a subset of those aspects.

For example, the majority of muslims are not extremists or terrorists. Nonetheless, Islam is the most problematic and violent religion in the world today. Both of these statements are true, but most people will only focus on the first or the latter.

>inb4

File: platoscave.gif (14KB, 334x206px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 334x206px

>>739769031
atomically this may be true but the human condition makes it not true because humans are imperfect beings.
Id give examples but that wouldnt change your mind because your truth is that truth is non subjective

>>739768832
>I get this but the one in the bottom right still makes the wall have gaps in it because the wall is flat and the cylinder is round on that side.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN?!?! I HAVE TO KNOW

>>739767769
its just bullshit. like 90% of the shit you will find on the internet. welcome to the internet.

>>739767938
False. There can also be two truths or no truths at all. Not everything is black or white.

>>739769587
>humans are imperfect beings.
This presupposes that there is such a thing as a perfect being against which we are compared. Yet, there's no support for such a being. Consequently, the remainder of your post is faggotry.

>>739767769
>JPEG
whoever made that image is clearly a massive retarded cunt faggot cunt

>>739768394
That's the whole point of the image, dumbass. The truth can be viewed and interpreted from the view you choose.

>>739769031
Absolutely false. Virtually nothing is black or white.

>>739768017
You're the retarded one here. That's a cylinder, not a sphere. Shining from that angle WOULD make a square.

>>739769587
>me being imperfect means me getting things wrong doesnt mean i got things wrong bc i thought i was right
how the fuck has your family tree survived long enough to create you

The silhouettes on the wall by definition provide an order of magnitude less information than the full "truth" cylinder. This could be expressed as, "To the exponentially uninformed, many truths seem to exist simultaneously."

>>739769791
>>739769996
>Too stupid to understand a lick of philosophical human nature
>resorts to ad hominem
typical

>>739767769
it means that there are multiple truths to things, that's it.

>>739768377
fucking just bust out a cad drawing to illustrate to this dumbass... I like it

>>739770304
Um, no. Adding another dimension provides *more* information, yes. But an "order of magnitude" means precisely *ten times more* which is not the case here.

>>739769816

Ben Kenobi said it best..
>Luke, you will find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view..

>>739770499
>typical
Saying 'typical' is not an argument.


Faggot.

>>739768554
The size might be a bit off but the cylinder is a square from the side view, making it able to fit in.
The memes point is right but the drawing of it is slightly off scale.

>>739770499
You're dodging the statements and questions posed to you. Typical.

>>739767769
On the left you have Catholicism and on the right, Protestantism. Christ is Truth.

>>739770304
Explain how the definition of 'silhouette on the wall' is 'an order of magnitude'.

You also used the word 'magnitude' wrong.

>>739767769
Its more bullshit from the Marxists polluting colleges these days.disregard. you'll feel better if you do.

>>739769587
I'm not sure what reality warping super powers you have, but, for most people, our misinterpretations don't change the truth.

Can or can't. Do or don't. Does or doesn't. Is or isn't. Will or won't. Right or wrong. Truth is absolute.

>>739769895
If something is only partially true the it is false. White lies are still lies.

>>739771030
I think he means how the object has three dimensions and the silhouette is only two.

>>739771283
But "order of magnitude" doesn't mean "more," it means "ten times more." You don't pull a figure like "ten times" out of nowhere.

>>739770673
>>739771030
are you people retarded? each "true" statment gives x^2 information, the "truth" gives x^3

it is literally the definition of an order of magnitude more information

fuckin idiots

>>739768118
allah is the truth

>>739771604
Kys

>>739769784
what?

>>739771433
>>739770673
>order of magnitude means 10x

lol wow you people are fucking stupid

>>739769791
We may not be able to realistically imagine what perfection would be like, but we have the concept, and we do not qualify.

You should be more upset that he seems to be making a truth claim while simultaneously claiming that truth is subjective.

dude have you take any math course? pick up your textbook and read it.

>>739768554
have you ever put a coin in a machine thats how

>>739771765
but don't blow anyone else up when you do ffs.

>>739767769
there is only one truth but will have different perspectives from different angles.

>>739767769
Its all about perspective

>>739769784
Wrong again...there's always 3 sides to a story...yours...mine...and the truth

>>739767769
Basically I look at it as, yet the rectangle and circle is true, the other circle isn't.. Sounds right if you smoke a bit of weed.

>>739768939
did you finish that book?

YALL ARE FUCKING RETARDED
HAVE YOU NEVER HEARD OF GODEL'S INCOMPLETENESS THEOREMS
JESUS CHRIST TRUTH DEPENDS ON THE AXIOMS YOU CHOOSE TO CONSIDER THE SYSTEM IN HOLY SHIT YOU KIDS ARE FUCKING BRAINLETS KYS ALL OF YOU I ACTUALLY WANT TO DIE BECAUSE OF THE STUPIDITY

>>739774781
And still, on whatever axiom you decide, are there not truths?

>>739773961
I thought the three sides in this case were Top, Right, and Front

>>739774781
cont.
truth is a manmade concept we created in our heads in order to make sense of reality. Nothing is intrinsically true or false, with the exception of the majority of sentences in any logical language. In these languages, the axioms of these systems are arbitrarily chosen, i.e. determined by humans, making the results useful but inane in our search for "truth" with a capital T. Please respond.

File: 1401402807820.jpg (8KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 240x240px

>>739775450
ba-dum-chhhh!

>>739774781
livestream?

>>739775199
yes there are truths but the point is a true statement in one system can be false in another, so when asking if a statement is true or false, one must specify the axioms. Asking if a statement is true or false without specifying any axioms is pointless. People who say that there exists absolute truth are wrong. thats the point.

>>739774781
then just die already genius

>>739767769
The orange and blue lights shine on the object in the middle and create shadows of it. These lights represent different opinions. So the orange "opinion" sees the object as rectangular, and the blue "opinion" sees it as a circle. They are both technically right even though they are different, but both opinions fail to see the full true shape for what it is.

Basically just because someone has a different perspective from you doesn't mean they're wrong. And you have to consider many different perspectives to get a full understanding of a given issue.

>>739769587
possibly the most retarded post in this thread so far

>>739769587
>but the human condition makes it not true because humans are imperfect beings.

so humans are perfect beings then?

>>739767769
Turn the cylinder on it's side.

>>739767919
studying godel's theorem should be a prereq for lsd imo

File: Shakes in B A N G A R S.jpg (44KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 500x500px

>>739776429
lrn2read

>>739767769
the different colors are supposed to be peoples opinions

>>739767769
There are four lights

>>739776590
he says truth is not absolute because humans are imperfect beings.

what's lrn2read by the way? i'm pretty old and I don't know teenage girls' lingo

File: 1475442422451.jpg (109KB, 1024x569px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1024x569px

>>739776481
From a philosophical point of view, I think the cylinder represents a story between two people, and the cylinder is each persons version of said story. It fits a certain way depending on the view point.

>>739767769
Actually it's a lie. We know light does not stay confined as shown - it has diffusion even with a good throw focusing lens.
Those colors would be blended and not stay true blue or true brown.
Also, there is no brown light.

>>739767769
if you only see one side is true you do not see the truth. change your perspective.

>>739767769
It's easy... "Trap is gay" is a truth...

>>739775776
You're having your cake and eating it here. You're making truth claims about axioms without declaring them?

There is a point where being pedantic is more useless than not. You're crossing that threshold right now.

To the extent that a truth is necessarily true within any axiom, then there is absolute truth.

>>739767769
Truth is not subjective. It is absolute.
We just often cannot or will not see other angles that are also true, unless it suits us to do so.

>>739775776
Truth IS absolute.
you are talking about people's point of view and how they manipulate the truth.

>>739767769
This shit is fuckinging niggerish. The truth is that the actual item is cylindrical, which is obvious when you combine the two options, instead of opposing one in preference of the other. This is literally a perfect why of describing science

I think i understand what op is getting at here

If we imagine the shadows to be holes in the walls that the shape must fill in then the square hole would not be completely full creating an error. but the circular hole would create a flat wall making it complete, so i guess there can be two perceived truths but only one of them is the actual truth.

>>739777266
That really depends on your perspective, don't you think? Didn't you just recognize that truth is defined as it suits people?

>>739778957
No, he did not just recognize that.

"will not see [the truth]... unless it suits us..."

So the only thing that depends on your perspective is your opinion, not what the truth is.

>>739768801
you also lack critical thinking.
it would fit if you rotated it, shitlord.

>>739779254

Are you sure?

>>739780111
Yes. I can be sure because I I'm not a wishy-washy cuck. I believe, necessarily, that my views are founded on truth, and that they are better than yours.

>>739780457

Of course you douche. However, your analysis of language and the function of mind seems rather shallow, as their implications are the subject at hand basically define it.

It's a retarded shitposting NEETs pretend to understand philosophy and the universe episode!

>>739780723
You might be right about my analytical skills being shallow, because I don't really understand much else about what you just said.

What's the alternative to what I said? How could we determine who's correct about things if truth is a matter of perspective?

I did give you a shitlord answer, but I don't think that makes me wrong.

>>739777469

Prove it. Only what is observed can be "known", and what is "known" can only exist in a mind. Tell me how your mind's truth is absolute, usurping any similar claims? Speaking of absolute truth is necessarily pure projection. Whether or not it exists cannot be said with certainty. There is "some stuff" it would seem, that is structure onto which people project their ego and often infer they have discerned the absolute. It's amusing.

There are two sides to every story. Unless you see both perspectives you do not know the truth.

>>739767769
both true?..i dont really see the problem here

>>739781707
How is this thought not fucked on by cogito ergo sum or sum (haha) derivative of it?

>>739767769
It's a metaphor about individual perspective.
Basically if you look at the shape dead on from the shadow it either looks square or circular. Both perspectives are true, but the actual shape "truth" requires deeper examination.

>>739781434

I don't mean to say you're wrong necessarily, but if you think it through - you'll see there's more to consider. Once you get past the apparent infinite depth of rabbit hole, you can choose a practical, dramatic, comedic, etc. place to hang your philosophical basis as is suits you for a given challenge. I'm just fascinated by the whole subject so I've delved deeper than most I think. Ultimately I believe that there is no point to "absolute truth" and it's a hollow position to grasp, I go for the utility of "what seems to give me a chance not to die for a while" as basis stuff, then up the chain I enjoy whatever frivolity is most useful at a give time whilst attempting to maintain the humility required to respect the underlying utilitarian basis.

>>739780014
>fit
wtf r u talking about?

>>739782251

because cogito ergo sum is wrong and emo.

it's really just "I am", which an assumption or in the context of the incompleteness theorem, a form of axiom.

>>739777001
how is that "philosophical," you dumbfuck?

>>739782860

So by mentioning the incompleteness theorem, hopefully you can see the point.

>>739768554
are you legitimately retarded, or a woman?

>>739782860
While I understand there's an argument that it doesn't follow that I am, at least I think. I don't really see how that's an assumption (let alone emo?).

And if we go as far as to say that my thinking is contained in an axiom, I feel like we get regress. These axioms, after all, need to be thought in.

>>739769031
Are you fucking retarded? We're talking philosophical points of view here. Not fucking facts vs not facts.
Stay in school

File: Teucrium fruitescens.jpg (219KB, 618x587px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 618x587px

>>739782860
>I string together phrases I've heard smart people say, and though I know it makes no sense, I can't help but shitpost on the off chance that some other dumbfuck might mistake it for a profundity, since he assumes anything he doesn't understand must be understandable and profound to *someone*.

WTF does Godel have to do with ontology? Answer: nothing. Even assuming "I am" is an axiom to some system, there's good reason to think such a non-numerical system to be complete, and there's again no reason to think the system has any relevance to ontology.

you are WAY out of your league here, punk. go home and hug your teddy bear, faggot.

>>739769975
No. The shadow should be blury on the top and the bottom.

>>739783063

Goedel showed us that, when falling through the looking glass, you've got to shove a stake in the wall of the hole to keep from falling (subjectively) forever. Well, that's one implication of the incompleteness thingy. I like it though as you can tell.

>>739783301
truth has been a topic of philosophy for 2500 years, faggot. the standard view of truth is Tarskian and that view holds there are no grey areas, as the anon said.

you've confused postmodernist/poststructuralist English/Gender Studies/etc. bullshit with legitimate and proper philosophy. The first is a mind virus and waste of time, the second is and has been the world's most valuable tool.

>>739783357

Lol, no I'm really not. I think it's you, chum.

>>739783357
I never gave any credentials! I am absolutely a novice at this, but I'm also on 4chan so no harm done?

I can't help but think that all of that wasn't meant for my post, given that I wasn't the one referencing Godel.

Also, is what I said actually wrong? The other guy's position seems rife with contradiction.

>>739771080
C'mon anon, you have to be aware of the liars paradox

>>739767769
explain these dubs

>>739783514
are you trolling? I sure fucking hope so, because you are a flailing faggot making an embarrassment of himself otherwise.

Godel's incompleteness results are about a very specific, very narrow domain of systems. Subjectivity has nothing to do with it.

>>739783770
Not him, but can't we just say that the liar's paradox has no truth value?

>>739783686
ok, little guy. Then answer the questions. Let's see how you fare.

I'm assuming you will run and hide now, as is the wont of little boys who have big words and no intellectual firepower to back them up.

>>739769031
Explain superposition

>>739769031
Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

>>739784007
You write like you got your feelings hurt by a bully.

>>739783741
OK, we're on 4chan. That's why I don't hesitate to hurt your feelings with honest feedback. I'm a professor of philosophy, so those are my credentials.

But, look, I'm not all evil and wickedness. Why don't you state for me your thesis in simple, straightforward language.

Can you do that? I'll actually try to help you now.

>>739784172
That statement in of itself is dealing in absolutes.
Thus Obi-wan is a Sith by his own reasoning.
The Jedi are hypocrites.

>>739784182
thanks for the diagnosis, Dr.Freud. your check's in the mail.

Personally, I think the main point is that our perception defines what we consider true, and without trying to see things from different angles we're bound to arrive at a subjective "true" instead of the objective truth because we can't perceive something from all sides. It's why I hesitate to comment on things before doing some research and trying to see "both" sides. Only idiots spout "true"s without trying to figure out if there's more to it than their singular point of view.

>>739784320
It felt like people in this thread were arguing that there could be no absolute truth. Admittedly, that feels redundant to me, and if there is no such thing, how can one assert it to be so?

That's where I'm coming from?
By the way, if you're being honest, I'm fucking tickled by the idea of a philosophy professor lurking on /b/.

>>739783357

Of course it's an axiom.

Whether or not the the "non-numerical system" is complete or not isn't really relevant. The question is, how can you know if it is or isn't? Well, you have to base that knowledge on an axiom as I mentioned. I think it's somewhat important though to recognize that you've done that, as the rest of your shit somewhat depends on that assumption. Sure it's fine if it works for you, but it apparently won't keep you from being a douchebag when pretending you understand anything about any of this. So why bother? So you can "protect" people by insisting your formal, spoon-fed, shallow clue is "absolute truth"? What a shame. This kid had potential.

>>739783627
Then if you studied that shit. Your little brainlet should grasp "truth" is intrinsic to the indivilual. It is subjective. Period.
This "muh absolute" is the cringiest shit I've ever seen. Its like reading a teen larp as a Witcher.
I hoping you're just confusing "truth" and "facts"

>>739783992
You can if you don't understand the paradox.

It tells a story.
Alice: "It's a circle."
Bob: "It's a square."
Both are truthful.

The lesson is:

Reality is complex enough to accommodate multiple truths simultaneously, if you look at things from different angles.

>>739784383
It can be said that all good is hypocritical in nature for we are imperfect and thus we must make mistakes, errors in judgement and decisions based in ignorance and imprudence, evils in consequence if not intent. Thus for evil to do good or demand good of others is hypocritical.
Also the hypocrisy of an accuser is not a valid defense of any action taken nor word spoken. The charge of hypocrisy is only used by men of slightly greater minds to command the attention of smaller minds, but even smaller minds must eventually see that hypocrisy nor the charge of it does not and cannot ever truly make a difference

>>739783453
Is this bait? Where would the blur come from you fucking idiot?

>>739784884
Okay.... and if we do think we understand the paradox, why can we not assert that it has no truth value?

>>739784320
>2017
>professor of philosophy
>PROFESSOR
>OF
>PHILOSOPHY
>2017
>On /b/
Post time stamp right now I want this to be true.
I want to see that pathetic face that is literally a waste of human life.
Please let this be real. Holy shit I'm actually giddy.

>>739784739
Hey, much better! That's a very good point. If one is asserting as true the statement "there is no true statement," then either one is contradicting oneself or else expressing nothing in the first place. Either way, they lose.

Real philosophers respect you much more when you speak in plain, simple terms. The best philosophers are like that (Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, Quine, Putnam, Kripke, etc.).

In normal discussions about "truth," people typically get confused between logical truth and epistemology. That is, between what makes a statement true/false and how we can ever KNOW that a statement is true/false. It is the knowledge part that gets us into the "grey zone." But, those are two different topics which should not be conflated together.

If you want a REALLY great, free source for all things philosophy, go to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Here's the entry on truth:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth/

Yes, even philosophy profs get bored out of their fucking minds and resort to the debasement of 4chan!

Keep up the clear thought, kid.

>>739767769
ITs refering to perspectives one persons sees one thing the other sees another but is t entirely true hence why the cylinder cant fit the square as it doesnt add up fir example i see a rainbow you saw a rainbow i see red blue green you saw more colours

>>739785004
I don't understand how you get from humans making mistakes to evil.

It feels like you're either equivocating good and humanity, or hypocritical and ironic/contradictory.

>>739785004
I think your making the mistake of Jedi=good.
It's an order of monks who take/train/brainwash children to fight for them. Preaching holier than thou rhetoric about balance while simultaneously murdering anyone who they declare Sith.

>>739785138
What am I your fucking sensei?
I'm not going to teach you. I'm not larping as a professor like that other faggot.

>>739785281
Thanks for the honest answer, prof. Cheers.

>>739785138
What do you mean by "truth value"?

>>739785475
I'm not asking for your anything other than an actual reason for you saying that I'm wrong.

That usually comes as a, you know, package deal when you try to shit on someone.

>>739785281
Please stop.
This shit is embarassing to read. Did you JUST come from gaia online?
Fuck me this is hard to read. You know that knee jerk reaction you get from really good lemon.
It's like that, but for my eyes

>>739785588
It's neither false nor true.

like the following: "potato."

>>739785446
Oh I forgot to mention they also cheat, steal, and violate the free will of others.
When you think about it the Jedi mind trick is fucked up. Much more sinister than anything the Sith do.

>>739783809

Not trolling. Hate trolls. I suppose I could have explained "what I take from the incompleteness theorem" - something like, "no formal system of logic can be proved from within itself (you can't use it to prove it?)" - it's basically the mathematical proof of "solipsism is solipsistic". It was unfair to assume you might see that same thing. I was hopeful. Perhaps you don't think that's a valid interpretation? Hell maybe I'm retarded. Teach me bitch. :P

>>739785663
You must be new

>>739785557
Please never post here again.

>>739785442
Evil doesn't lie solely in intent. That's not even where it's rooted. Evil exists conceptually because of consequence. Meaning the effects of ones actions.

>>739785446
I think you are the one making the mistake, and I believe that mistake in assuming that good and evil are not interchangeable bits of fluff that exist in the same manner beauty exists, primarily in the eye of the beholder.

>>739785740
So "truth value" is basically devoid of truth or value?

I think I understand what your trying to say though. Just a poor choice of words.
Potatoes however, do hold value.

>>739767769
it means somebody can still be correct while holding a different perspective than you

File: rektme.gif (2MB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 240x180px

>>739785841
Your cringing actually gives me strength.

>>739784811
"of course"? only in a trivial sense, cunt. Anything can be elected an axiom. Axioms are ad hoc, artificial systems of our own invention. The properties of such systems are not within our control, however.

Most non-numerical systems are complete. It takes very special circumstances to get them sufficiently rich enough to make them incomplete. Obviously, you've never read Godel, so you don't have a clue.

Knowledge has nothing to do with Godel and his incompleteness result. Nothing. That being said, it is relatively easy to know which systems are incomplete and which are complete. Godel gave us the method to determine this.

Your problem is confusing epistemology with truth. These are different topics. Truth happens whether we know it or not.

Take an example: Suppose you utter the sentence: "there is a tuna sandwich on the surface of Pluto right now." That statement is true just in case there really is a tuna sandwich on the surface of Pluto right now, and false otherwise. Do I KNOW whether it is true or false? Nope. But my knowing or not has nothing to do with the truth of the statement. That is a matter between the statement and the state of affairs on Pluto.

Does this help clear things up for you, cunt?

People are being taught to believe that there is more than one truth to everything. People are being taught that everything that used to be correct is now incorrect, and everything that was incorrect is now correct. These contradictions confuse the subconscious and leave it open to command from any authority. When the subject is properly confused the commands give them comfort. Like a scared child being told by an adult that everything will be ok. Beware of this. This is happening.

>>739785894
446 here
Your the one who brought up good and evil. Don't preach to me about them being worthless terms when you were the one who started using them.

>>739785954
Well, I don't know what else I'd call it. The 'truth value' of a proposition or statement would either be: true, n/a, false.

If you wanted to resolve the paradox by just sweeping it under the carpet, you would say this, I guess?

>>739784826
Truth is not intrinsic or subjective. Let's take an example. Suppose you have a recent photo of Donald Trump. Whether or not the structural features of that photo map onto the actual face of the real Donald Trump (by some specified function) is strictly an objective matter that has nothing to do with you or me or what we think or believe or desire. It is a relation that obtains (or fails to obtain) between two items in the universe.

You are confused about knowledge and truth. Knowledge has subjective elements (belief, for instance).

I have not confused truth and facts, though no one brought up the topic of facts, did they, faggot?

>>739786207
Please don't assume what other people would say.
It's a bad habit.

>>739785246
Hey, I take a shit like the rest of you cunts. 4chan is how I pass my time. what's so special about a professor? we're pretty common these days.

>>739786406
I just speak like a passive faggot. That's all me, coach.

>>739786153
I didn't say that they are worthless. You are the one that believes interchangeable fluff is interchangeable with worthless.
Should a machine accept two different parts to perform a function that does not make either part worthless, and should that part be fluff we use to fill out a coat or a childs toy, it still carries worth. Merely less worth than people ascribe to it. Placing it on some pedastal far above the clouds beyond human sight or reach does nothing but to convince us that it simply doesn't exist. Better to bring it down to the hands of people that they might examine it with their own eyes and learn what is to be learned from it, no matter how that knowledge might be measured.

>>739785588
In conventional logic, there are two truth values: True and False.

>>739784739

You don't think that epistemology kind of predicates all other "truths"? Certainly we can just move to a topic, assuming we've all assumed the same stuff about what we want to discuss, like logic. But well, meh, anyway I'm sure you get it or I'm too stoned to say it clearly enough. Regardless, I think Logic is a transform and paradoxes show us boundaries of logic and reveal the limits of language. Note that I didn't say there was "no truth", I said it's unknowable due to the limitations of language and perspective. "truth" requires context, and with that comes the baggage of language and perspective blah blah blah.