Posts for sixofour

1 2 3 4 5
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:48 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Kuwanga. 2+6=8. Sure we can all "agree" that it is, but anyone who thinks its not, is catagoricly, absolutly wrong. Saying Logic is not objective is saying that math is not objective, because in order for us to use math, we need the absolute system of logic.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:45 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:47 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Well, some people are born retarded. Hence "most people". I could ahve said "everyone" but then someone would have came along and said "wut abert dem retards lulz". edit: you are nitpicking. I think you know what I mean, the normal, sane born person is born with logical facilities.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:42 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
OH, Whether they USE logic or not is one thing. I'm just saying most people are born with the ability to understand logical things. When you go to school, your teacher in kindergarden or what ever, tells you what numbers are, she tells you what the plus and minus sign do. Then she gives you 10 problems, and you have to use your intuition, and the tools provided by her [numbers and functions] to solve those problems. And its required that you have both. [tools and intuition] The tools alone won't tell you the answer for every problem. And you cannot teach intuition. 6+2=8 "because it does"
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:34 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Um, math was not developed. But whatever. Ways of understanding math were developed, sure. Ways of exoplaining mathamatical forumla were developed sure. But 2 apples and 6 oranges doesn't make 8 fruit because humans said it does. It makes 8 fruit because it does, whether humans know about it or not. Its an infalliable universal fact.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:29 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:32 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Mathematics wasn't developed it was discovered. Meaning, it was already there, and the system its based on "logic" was already there. And my position is that people intuitivly have the ability to use logic. Even if they don't know that its logic they are using, or what its called. When I took logic classes I didn't learn any new ways to understand anything, I simply learned the terminology for what I already knew about. And I also posit that many people abandon this facility all together in favor of moral relativism. What goes along with what they want or feel, it taken over what is right and logical.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:25 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Sure, anyways the point is, in order for humans to develope anything at all, it is required that they have a logical way of doing something. Randomness doesn't produce organization.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:21 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Systems that don't have logic cannot function. People can twist and distort entities or results of a system in ways that are illogical, but the actual functioning follows a logic. Systems don't randomly do things, they would fall apart if that were the case.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:19 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:19 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
A system is by definition a set of logical rules. We build computers and base them off a set of logical rules, the same way everything else is absed on a set of logical rules.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:11 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Addition is something that requires logic to know. Its intuition. You are basiclly saying humans at one time did not have the ability to form systems at all. Then they observed something, then magiclly had a system to build systems.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:09 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:16 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
But how did observation help them? You are saying they observed two objects coming to gether, and called it 2. How did they know that? How did they know about the function of "adding"? Yes Kuwanga, observation provides data. What LagDotcom is saying they used data, without any kind of system for organizing or understanding that data, to build a system for understanding. He claims that at one point people couldn't tell the difference between left or right, had no concepts of numbers, and didn't have the capacity to attach names to things. If they observed two animals doing something, then months later, they ahd a baby. He claims, they wouldn't have known that the action thsoe two animals did many months ago, lead to this new baby.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:06 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:08 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Oh lol..really now? What system did we use to develope logic? What was the basis for humanities development of logic? And, how did they know that basis was correct? And, how did they know they even needed a basis? How did they know they needed logic?
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 9:38 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
World Of Goo - Red Carpet Extend-o-matic. URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Tu6rGhyT24
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 6:04 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 6:11 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Logic is intuition. That's the point. You are born with the facility of logic. An already set in stone system for how things works. A system that preceeds observation and expriense. A system that requires no anyalasis to develope it. This debate on the human brain was a demonstration to show that people don't use their logical facilities. Kuwanga was the only one [who posted] to realize that you cannot logically say either side is factual or not. No one else grasped that, they were too busy having egos or just being unable to see it.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 5:55 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Heh, People are still here talking about it. You guys [you know who you are...mabey] outright deny the existance of intuition, and the standardization of logic. Your world might aswell be static if everything you think of can be a changed variable. If nothing is absolute, then you know nothing, because everything is meaningless. You guys sound like Sophists. If you don't have an infalliable system to base your understanding of the world on, then you have no method of knowing if your understanding is true. That's the demonstration I provided in this thread. Who cares what you think about the human brain.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 9:43 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Obviously.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 8:53 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
That's not Ad Hominem :P Because that insult wasn't meant as a diversion around a topic.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 8:48 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
You are right, I don't accept things because they are written in a magazine.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 8:45 PM
(Edited: 6/16/2009 8:47 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
You posted links to stuff that isn't even relevent. I told you I don't accept speculation. No one in their right minds accepts random speculation from unknown websites wirtten by unknown people. If a few links is your best defence, then you have a pathetic defence. If you really knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't even have to refer to some outside source, this isn't wikipedia. Citation doesn't win debates.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 8:41 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Lol I'm not sorry, but you are an idiot. You come in here, say you are a leading scientist in what ever, you don't even post an opposing view to anything I said. And you claim I am pulling things out of thin air? I posted a statement. You walked in and said "I am a scientist" I said "so".. You said "so you come in posting a view backed by nothing, you are stupid, the fact that I am a scientist negates anything you say, even though I don't know what you are saying"... Oh the irony in this. Derakon said it best. There is no debate here.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 8:01 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
DarkKobold, as said before, no need for Ad Hominem. We all, all of us. Agree and know that you are a simplistic person. You don't have to push it anymore by claiming I made no arguement, based on your inability to see the logic behind arguements higher than your ability to understand them. Though, I forgive you, most people cannot grasp logic, so most people will tend to agree with you. That is the unfortinate thing about humanity, and one of the signs that humanity is devolving. Any linquist could tell you that.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 6:28 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
No shit. I was being ironic. [because I am the one he should have been refering to]
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 6:18 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Derekan you are pretty much wrong about most of that what you just stated. You are ignoring absolutes. [or you simply don't acknowledge they exist in the first place.] But I don't feel like arguing about it. @moozooh I don't know why I try. Some people are set in their beliefs and won't change, which, isn't a bad thing, unless your beliefs are wrong of course.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 5:45 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
This is a debate, and you lost. Btw, your "field" I pretty much write the whole thing off. As its merely speculation. And I don't make claims based on speculation. I gave you a logical explanation to your field. And you gave me appeal to authority fallacy. I am sure you think you have a point in there somewhere, you just lack the ability to articulate it, and to debate. You cannot use theories as evidence in a debate. Because theories are ideas that lack factal backing. And we are talking about facts.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 4:47 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Brain is not thought. Its an organ that deals with sensory organs. When you look at an MRI or whatever tool, and observe the brain, the impulses you see are reactions to that creatures thoughts. They are not the thoughts themselves. Just like when you speak, its only a translation of your thoughts. You have a person who loves beef, he thinks about a beef steak and you see a reaction to that thought taking place in the brain. Pleasure sections and imagery and smell sections all go off. As a reaction to that thought. Also, DarkKobold, I realize you are a very simplistic person, unable to understand simplistic things. But you should not use name calling and insults to try to debate.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/16/2009 3:59 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Could they all use the same one then? And redo the tests with that.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
1 2 3 4 5