|
|
 |
|
|
|
register |
bbs |
search |
rss |
faq |
about
|
|
|
meet up |
add to del.icio.us |
digg it
|
|
|
| My God Can Beat the Shit Out of Your God For discussing any and all religious viewpoints. Intolerance will not be tolerated. Keeping your sense of humor is required. Posting messages about theological paradoxes is encouraged. |
 |
|
# 1
2004-02-10, 20:39
|
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
1+1=2
why?
how is it that arbitrary symbols together are equal to another arbitrary symbol?
|
# 2
2004-02-10, 21:20
|
|
Regular
|
|
SomeEverydayNobody
|
|
The symbols are irrelevant, we simply use these symbols because life would be a lot more difficult without them.
No matter what symbol you use to represent each value, a single value added to another single value equals two single values.
All we've done is create symbols to correspond with the values to make our lives easier. I really don't know where you're going with this but if you're attempting to in anyway negate scientific theories based on the fact that you think math is nothing but 'arbitrary symbols' leading to more 'arbitrary symbols' then don't expect to succeed.
Once again, the symbols mean nothing we simply use them to make our lives easier. Have you ever seen a long mathematical equation? Imagine trying to write it out or even solve it without individual symbols to indiciate individual values!
|
# 3
2004-02-11, 04:29
|
|
|
good reply ^^
|
# 4
2004-02-11, 05:27
|
|
Regular
|
|
edmonton,alberta,canada
|
|
SEN D-F is right. its exactly like words. u cant call numbers arbitrary without saying the same for words. numbers arent quite as often used as word, but there theoretically a hell of a lot more important. but if u get on the topic of infinity, i may be forced to kill u...
|
# 5
2004-02-11, 10:56
|
|
|
Its all symbolic. EVERYTHING!!!!
|
# 6
2004-02-11, 17:06
|
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
Good at least it shows you think for yourself.
|
# 7
2004-02-11, 17:54
|
|
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by ilbastardoh:
1+1=2
why?
|
One plus one does not equal two. You just think it does. "One plus one" is a concept that approximates the physical world, but can never reflect it...what would you say?...exactly or accurately? "One plus one equals two", does not exist in the real world, and you have to be able to see that to be able to understand anything else in a more useful, nondestructive, manner.
[This message has been edited by bkc (edited 02-11-2004).]
|
# 8
2004-02-11, 23:29
|
|
|
A dog is not Canis familiaris. You just think it is. The phrase "a dog" is a concept that approximates the physical world, but can never reflect it...what would you say?...exactly or accurately? The phrase "a dog", does not exist in the real world, and you have to be able to see that to be able to understand anything else in a more useful, nondestructive, manner.
|
# 9
2004-02-11, 23:55
|
|
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Craftian:
A dog is not Canis familiaris. You just think it is. The phrase "a dog" is a concept that approximates the physical world, but can never reflect it...what would you say?...exactly or accurately? The phrase "a dog", does not exist in the real world, and you have to be able to see that to be able to understand anything else in a more useful, nondestructive, manner.
|
The sentiment coming through on your reply seems to be one of mocking sarcasm, making fruitful discussion unlikely.
|
# 10
2004-02-12, 02:30
|
|
Regular
|
|
Tea and Crumpets country
|
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by bkc:
The sentiment coming through on your reply seems to be one of mocking sarcasm, making fruitful discussion unlikely.
|
The eloquence of your post is most eloquent.
|
|
#11
2004-02-12, 04:41 |
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
 Re: prove this
So if you know this then why haven't you realized what what religion or government, or any other institution is?
|
|
#12
2004-02-12, 04:59 |
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
Re: prove this
Also see how you create your reactions based on what you believe to be so? I mean after all you people are pointing this out to me. Yet, you are also creating a reality about me that assumes I don't know these things. I hope i'm not sounding defensive, in reality I just asked that question so that you could answer your own question about why we use these symbols.
|
|
#13
2004-02-12, 06:00 |
DestruKtiKon 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: prove this
"To transcend our isolation and make some kind of connection with one another" - Waking Life.
|
|
#14
2004-02-12, 06:37 |
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
Re: prove this
Yet 60% of language is non-verbal. Our symbols are nothing but maps, representations of the actual territory which is interaction of ideas, thoughts, and feelings. Things that we express naturally, had we not given so much imagined power to those symbols.
|
|
#15
2004-02-12, 08:00 |
|
|
Re: prove this
quote:Originally posted by bkc:
The sentiment coming through on your reply seems to be one of mocking sarcasm, making fruitful discussion unlikely.
My point was that both of our posts held the exact same amount of meaning; that is to say, none at all.
|
|
#16
2004-02-12, 10:13 |
|
Regular
|
|
Tea and Crumpets country
|
|
Re: prove this
^ How about this point *Holds middle finger aloft*
Just kidding.
|
|
#17
2004-02-12, 14:43 |
|
|
Re: prove this
quote:Originally posted by Craftian:
My point was that both of our posts held the exact same amount of meaning; that is to say, none at all.
The point I put forth is my reason for living. Its true, this can be seen as nothing, or "none at all", or it can be seen as everything.
|
|
#18
2004-02-12, 17:18 |
|
|
Re: prove this
I think it's amazing the way some people can write so many words without them having any meaning at all.
Aside to everybody else: can you make sense of bkc's comments? If so, can you restate them in a way that is meaningful?
[This message has been edited by Craftian (edited 02-12-2004).]
|
|
#19
2004-02-17, 15:58 |
|
|
Re: prove this
quote:Originally posted by Craftian:
Aside to everybody else: can you make sense of bkc's comments? If so, can you restate them in a way that is meaningful?
Start over with one thing at a time:
Can you see that one plus one equals two?
Now, I'll assume that you answer, "Of course, one plus one is two, everyone knows it to be so".
Okay, now can you tell me a way of looking at it in which one plus one does not equal two?
If you can, that is the whole point of my argument. And I will explain how the one plus one thing applies to all other questions, including religion, philosophy and science.
|
|
#20
2004-02-17, 16:53 |
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
Re: prove this
Easy stop attaching arbitrary symbols to values you don't understand yet. No object in this universe is one, at least non that we can measure. Everey thing is made up of other stuff, and groups of things make up other stuff. Everey object that exists only makes one universe, and who's to say that this universe is the only one that exists. Things are too specific and too vast at the same time for values to have any relevant importance when viewed as a whole. Yet from our partial viewpoint it does make sense because we omit certain things, we dont' completely see how paradoxical our reality really is.
|
|
#21
2004-02-17, 17:56 |
|
|
Re: prove this
quote:Originally posted by bkc:
Okay, now can you tell me a way of looking at it in which one plus one does not equal two?
No. Can you?
2 is defined as being 1 more than 1. x + y is defined as being the value y more than x.
From this it follows that 1+1=2. If you redefine the terms 1, 2 and + then we are no longer talking about the same things and your statement has no meaning.
|
|
#22
2004-02-17, 18:04 |
|
|
Re: prove this
quote:1+1=2
why?
It's called communication. I know that the square of the length of the hypotenuse of a right angle triangle is equal to the squares of the lengths of the other two sides, and you know that the square of the length of the hypotenuse of a right angle triangle is equal to the squares of the lengths of the other two sides, but it's a bit long winded. What would be better is to assume that since we know the rule we have seen a diagram with a right angle triangle with "a" on one side, "b" on the other side, and "c" on the hypotenuse, and then I could've just said "you know that a^2+b^2=c^2" etc.
If I want to tell someone that sinA/a = sinB/b + sinC/c then I can, I don't have to explain that "if you express the lengths of a triangle as arbitary units, you can find any given angle or side using the fact that the value of the side opposite the angle devided by the value of the side opposite the right angle in a right angle triangle for a certain angle in a non-right angle triangle times the size of the angle (in an arbitrary unit representing a 360th of a full circle) devided by the length of the side opposite it is equal to the value of the side opposite the angle devided by the value of the side opposite the right angle in a right angle triangle for a certain angle in a non-right angle triangle times the size of the angle (in an arbitrary unit representing a 360th of a full circle) devided by the length of the side opposite it for the other two sides."
Numbers are just arbitrary units used to communicate things which apply in the real world. They are labels given to things we observe to make it easier to communicate our thoughts to our peers.
"Numbers don't mean shit, maaan". Give it a rest. Cutting-edge pseudo philosopy is all well and good untill you try and apply it to the real world.
quote:I think it's amazing the way some people can write so many words without them having any meaning at all.
Too right. I wish I could, then I'd be able to get better than C+ in my English essays  . |
|
#23
2004-02-17, 19:12 |
|
|
Re: prove this
quote:Originally posted by ilbastardoh:
1+1=2
why?
how is it that arbitrary symbols together are equal to another arbitrary symbol?
Because those "arbitrary symbol" are dictated by us, we make the rules and therefore we can make two arbitrary symbols equal another.
|
|
#24
2004-02-18, 15:56 |
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
Re: prove this
^^ Thank you you got it, do you see, do you see the creative power we humans have? Why not exploit your own creative power, instead of having others exploit it for you?
|
|
#25
2004-02-18, 19:01 |
hangover
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: prove this
U wanna know why 1+1=2 ? Ok I'll try to explain: Imagine two apples in two different baskets, now take an apple from one basket and put it in the other, you'll end up with 2 apples in one basket, hence 1 (as in one apple) + 1 (the apple from the other basket) = 2. It's not that hard to understand really. If you want me to explain this in more detail just say so and I'll try to do it.
|
|
#26
2004-02-18, 20:08 |
|
Regular
|
|
Wherever there's consciousness
|
|
Re: prove this
A 1 does not represent an apple, unless we say so.
|
|
#27
2004-02-18, 20:59 |
|
|
Re: prove this
quote:Originally posted by ilbastardoh:
A 1 does not represent an apple, unless we say so.
HOLY SHIT, I THINK HE'S ON TO SOMTHING!
Quickly, phone the white house!
This is news to no one. If people didn't know that 1 is only a commonly used representation, and that meanings can be attatched to other symbols at will, society wouldn't function.
|
|
#28
2004-02-18, 21:16 |
theBishop
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: prove this
This thread is getting excedingly redundant. The arabic symbols that represent numbers are a way to make an abstraction (the idea of '1', one, . ) concrete. Perhaps it would be better if out number system looked like this:
. = 1
.. = 2
... = 3
So,
. + . = ..
but even the "+" and "=" are symbols. We need symbols to make abstract ideas concrete. I'm not sure what the question is at this point since the second post basically said what i said.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
totse.com certificate signatures
|
|
|
About | Community | Bad Ideas | Drugs | Ego | Erotica | Fringe | Society | Technology
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]()
![]()
|
Linear Mode
Switch to Hybrid Mode
Switch to Threaded Mode