/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #13646989

83KiB, 600x554, 69131ECC-C886-40D2-BA54-99BFD007BF5C.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 01:36:28 2021 No.13646989 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>13647273 >>13647743 >>13647757 >>13647871 >>13648136 >>13648288 >>13648327 >>13648473 >>13648552 >>13649252 >>13651457 >>13651514 >>13651741 >>13653001

Everything is a subset of logic and math, prove me wrong

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 03:07:57 No.13647271 Report

Quoted By:

>>13647269
venus spins upside down everything is in order

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 03:09:34 No.13647273 Report

Quoted By: >>13648560

>>13646989
i cant

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 07:43:24 No.13647743 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
if you go on wikipedia and click every second hyper-text on any article you'll reach mathematics or philosophy

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1499109821809.png, 1MiB, 1688x2000

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 07:53:11 No.13647757 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
Your mom is a member of the set of everything.
Your mom is so fat, her cardinality exceeds that of any mathematical or logical object.
Therefore everything cannot be a subset of logic and math. QED.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 09:07:33 No.13647871 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
counter example: fluid dynamics

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 09:08:51 No.13647875 Report

Quoted By: >>13648179

counterexample: logic and math

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO LogicalFallacy.jpg, 65KiB, 620x390

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:08:19 No.13648136 Report

Quoted By: >>13648151 >>13648184

>>13646989

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:16:33 No.13648151 Report

Quoted By:

>>13648136
That's not a logical fallacy. Why can't debooter sois into basic logic?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:34:37 No.13648179 Report

Quoted By: >>13648184 >>13648188

>>13647875
Here's something funny:
You can't directly prove LEM, but you can disprove it being wrong, that is safely use it as an axiom.
How does that fit in your internet rhetoric infographic?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:36:15 No.13648184 Report

Quoted By:

>>13648179
Meant for
>>13648136

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:39:21 No.13648188 Report

Quoted By: >>13648205

>>13648179
>you can disprove it being wrong, that is safely use it as an axiom
That'd count as a substantial argument in favor of your position, in contrast to "LEM, bruh. Prove me wrong!". You're as much of a retard as he is.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:47:16 No.13648205 Report

Quoted By: >>13648239 >>13648242

>>13648188
Relax cunt, I have no position on OP. I'm just saying burden of proof has low use beyond rhetoric.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:55:54 No.13648239 Report

Quoted By: >>13648261

>>13648205
And then you totally fail to substantiate it, because your example is one of taking up the burden of proof.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:56:23 No.13648242 Report

Quoted By: >>13648251

>>13648205
It has a use to start a debate and have a conversation instead of the shit posting everyone has been doing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 12:59:14 No.13648251 Report

Quoted By:

>>13648242
Debates are intellectually worthless, and merely a form of propaganda tailored to midwits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 13:01:36 No.13648261 Report

Quoted By: >>13648265

>>13648239
Here you go, you demanding little bitch.
If your axiom is consistent with you current system and has sufficient use, there's no need to disprove it being wrong to make use of it. Basically "axiom, prove me wrong" is not wrong, midwit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 13:02:53 No.13648265 Report

Quoted By: >>13648274

>>13648261
>"axiom, prove me wrong" is not wrong
I never said it was wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 13:04:40 No.13648274 Report

Quoted By: >>13648287

>>13648265
But according to burden of proof, it's a logical fallacy to make use of it, whatever that means to rheddittoricians such as yourself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 13:07:01 No.13648287 Report

Quoted By: >>13648299

>>13648274
>But according to burden of proof, it's a logical fallacy to make use of it
Who cares? I wasn't defending his usage of this supposed fallacy. I just said your attempt at refuting him is fucking retarded, because it doesn't demonstrate something becoming widely accepted without proof.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 13:07:25 No.13648288 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
Counter-argument: Everything is a subset of art, prove me wrong

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 13:09:55 No.13648299 Report

Quoted By:

>>13648287
What was I attempting to disprove? I'm just mocking him, like I'm mocking you for taking rhetoric or any statements in a language with semantics as logic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 13:20:46 No.13648327 Report

Quoted By: >>13648529

>>13646989
math is a subset of philosophy

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:06:24 No.13648451 Report

Quoted By:

Math and language is a tiny subset of the universe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:11:32 No.13648473 Report

Quoted By: >>13648496 >>13648530

>>13646989
Counterpostulate: everything is a subset of a list of numbers, prove me wrong

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:17:10 No.13648496 Report

Quoted By: >>13648533

>>13648473
you mean can be represented as a list of numbers?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:25:26 No.13648529 Report

Quoted By:

>>13648327
1+1=2 is a fact everywhere we look in the physical universe, its not philosophy even remotely

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:25:27 No.13648530 Report

Quoted By:

>>13648473
array of numbers > t*rdskian truth

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:26:27 No.13648533 Report

Quoted By:

>>13648496
no it all really is just a giant list of numbers and our "consciousness" is just a machine reading those numbers in a linear fashion, this is also why time exists/is an illusion

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:28:55 No.13648541 Report

Quoted By: >>13649323

>>13647078
> philosophy

hahahahahahahaha

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:30:26 No.13648544 Report

Quoted By: >>13649342

>>13647238
based

all that exists (can be implemented) is a computation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:32:46 No.13648552 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
No it's turtles all the way down.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 14:35:32 No.13648560 Report

Quoted By:

>>13647273
based honest-poster

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 17:36:05 No.13649252 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
everything is a subset of everything. math originates from our brain observing and computing

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 17:52:22 No.13649323 Report

Quoted By: >>13649334

>>13648541
Filtered

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 17:54:37 No.13649334 Report

Quoted By:

>>13649323
Indeed. It's actually sad they wasted their time getting into philosophy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 17:56:25 No.13649342 Report

Quoted By: >>13651237

>>13648544
Of course when you say can be implemented you mean by an imaginary magical machine with infinite memory and infinite processing capacity correct?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 18:00:15 No.13649354 Report

Quoted By: >>13649400

>>13647078
Name one philosophy book that doesn't use logic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 18:15:56 No.13649400 Report

Quoted By: >>13649410

>>13649354
name one logic book which doesn't use philosophy

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Sep 2021 18:19:13 No.13649410 Report

Quoted By: >>13651243

>>13649400
>he's trying to use logic to prove logic is based on philosophy
You basically admitted defeat, kek.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 07:12:59 No.13651237 Report

Quoted By:

>>13649342
No.
Infinity can not be implemented.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 07:14:08 No.13651243 Report

Quoted By:

>>13649410
based

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 08:41:54 No.13651457 Report

Quoted By: >>13654468

>>13646989
Ok. Everything is a subset. But is {Everything} a ‘sub’set?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 09:04:55 No.13651514 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
counterexample: women

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 7b3.jpg, 215KiB, 1000x1478

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 09:06:04 No.13651516 Report

Quoted By:

>everything is in your head

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 10:59:06 No.13651741 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
>prove me wrong
No, how about you prove you're right

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 18:21:49 No.13653001 Report

Quoted By:

>>13646989
Is physics a subset of logic and/or math?
If the answer is yes, then you're right.
If the answer is nope, then you're wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 18:32:18 No.13653040 Report

Quoted By: >>13653084

While most of nature can be broken down into mathematical abstractions. Such as a particle is a geometric shape that changes location across a space. Quantum particles are waves of probability, etc..
What about the soul and awareness. There are other fundamental properties at play here such as the order of ideas themselves and information.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Sep 2021 18:43:25 No.13653084 Report

Quoted By:

>>13653040
>There are other fundamental properties at play here such as the order of ideas themselves and information.
Subset of logic, they even can be described with bits as the unit of information.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Sep 2021 04:13:52 No.13654468 Report

Quoted By: >>13654877

>>13651457
Yes. Everything is a subset of itself brainlet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Sep 2021 09:22:52 No.13654877 Report

Quoted By:

>>13654468
Yes. But not a subset of logic and math brainlet.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches