TED Conversations

Casey Christofaris

Owner, CS3 Inc

TEDCRED 10+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

How do we prove an answer

that it How do we prove an answer


I just want to clarify that I do love science and the understanding of the universe that it has brought us. As well as the tech

+1
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Feb 4 2013: in your eyes it does Mr. Long.
    • thumb
      Feb 5 2013: So, are you wrong and right simultaneously? If so you have falsified # 2 and 3 of the Classical Logic Laws:
      1) Law of Identity- An object is the same as itself.
      2) Law of Non-contradiction- “A” cannot be both “A” and “Not A”.
      3) Law of the Excluded Middle- Either a proposition or its negation is true.
      • thumb
        Feb 5 2013: Where the proof that these laws are true
        • thumb
          Feb 6 2013: Casey. Mr. Long is absolutely right to point out Laws, and, you have every right to challenge them, however we must remember that we are all governed by laws for without them it would be total chaos.
          cheers
      • thumb
        Feb 5 2013: It a giant lets agree to disagree conversation. To end the arguments. To end the circle logic and thought. We have been discovering circles for a very long time.

        for every action creates an equal but opposite reaction, but hey maybe newton was wrong and the other guy was right. He did steal some work I believe maybe he's just a shady person
      • thumb
        Feb 6 2013: Mr. Long. I said. 'In YOUR eyes' I am not assuming multiple scenarios, you are!
        cheers
        • thumb
          Feb 6 2013: What I mean is the Laws of Logic cannot be dependent upon how an individual assesses a given situation. Laws are independent from human appraisal, interpretation, or evaluation. If the question is, "Is Mr. Sergi correct?", and one person believes you are correct while a second person believes you are incorrect does not mean that you are both correct [A] and incorrect [Not A] (Rule 2). Without Logic we would truly live in the arbitrary, Gordian Knot of a world of Mr. Christofaris. Either the proposition that you are correct is true, or the proposition that you are not correct is true (Rule 3). There are not multiple levels, or scenarios, of truth, it is binary. . . True or False. We may be unable to answer every question, but there is an answer to every question.
        • thumb
          Feb 6 2013: @ ed

          trust me I use these laws for everday life the point it nothing can be proven 100% and yes in a specific system something can be both true and not true because it will always lay with the definition that defines it.

          "True or False. We may be unable to answer every question, but there is an answer to every question."

          What if I can show you how 2 men can come to the same conclusion and both men correct and wrong at the same time. But of course only by the way we define or use arbitrary labels to define things.

          Also the best thing about thinking out side of the box is realizing that there is just another box to think out side of. So it not about thinking outside the box, its about thinking in all boxes
      • thumb
        Feb 6 2013: @ Vincenzo

        I agree whole heartily and use laws to figure out and talk about all types of matter on here. You do realize we live in high entropy always . And it is the laws that try to create low entropy from high entropy but fail miserably doing so. However sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.

        The idea of creating order out of chaos should be one of the founding definitions of insanity. Because it simply can not be done. It can look like it. I guess that's what these material world is, order out of chaos.
        Thanks for that I have not looked at the material world that why before, and cool enough QP backs that up

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.