godzillatemple
|
posted on September 24, 2001 10:00:37 AM new
"Wherever you go, there you are."
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
|
stockticker
|
posted on September 24, 2001 10:04:52 AM new
...unless you are "here".
|
uaru
|
posted on September 24, 2001 10:17:54 AM new
4 out of 5 people make up 80% of the population.
|
stockticker
|
posted on September 24, 2001 10:22:47 AM new
...unless you define "population" as inhabitants rather than people. In that case, your statement is false, uaru. Animals should be included as inhabitants. 
Irene
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 24, 2001 10:27:37 AM new
Animals should be included as inhabitants.
Only if they pay taxes.
|
uaru
|
posted on September 24, 2001 10:54:20 AM new
Animals should be included as inhabitants.
That would explain the inclusion of some of as part of the population in Afghanistan I suppose.
[ edited by uaru on Sep 24, 2001 10:55 AM ]
|
kiheicat
|
posted on September 24, 2001 12:47:45 PM new
Zilvy:
A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking.
LOL!
|
godzillatemple
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:07:01 PM new
cogito ergo spud
I think, therefore I yam.
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:09:54 PM new
I think, therefore I yam.
Now we're geetting to the root of it.
|
snowyegret
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:11:29 PM new
Shouldn't that be mrpotatoheadd's line?
You have the right to an informed opinion
-Harlan Ellison
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:13:42 PM new
Gender prevents me from being an Aunt.
A little surgery would take care of that.
|
DoctorBeetle
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:18:42 PM new
Microbes.... Crossing my legs and thinking dirty thoughts at you....
Dr. Beetle
|
godzillatemple
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:21:08 PM new
The square of the hypotenuse is less hip than the cool cats who live on the other two sides
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
|
uaru
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:22:56 PM new
A little surgery would take care of that
I'm not trying to sound vain or anything but I'd hope such a proceedure wouldn't qualify as 'little surgery' if I switched from the Uncle to the Aunt column.
|
DoctorBeetle
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:25:05 PM new
Well Uaru I considered addressing the same point but I didn't want to take the chance of engendering any envy.
Dr. Beetle
Edited for UBB booboo
[ edited by DoctorBeetle on Sep 24, 2001 01:25 PM ]
|
figmente
|
posted on September 24, 2001 01:35:48 PM new
One can argue with facts, no matter how plain.
But the self contradiction stands up to the game.
This statement is false.
To argue is vain.
Agree or dissent, is equally lame.
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 24, 2001 02:59:47 PM new
This statement is false.
A statement like that is nonsense.
|
figmente
|
posted on September 24, 2001 03:12:10 PM new
Undecidable, but far from nonsense. Check out any popularization of Godel.
[ edited by figmente on Sep 24, 2001 03:16 PM ]
|
Shadowcat
|
posted on September 24, 2001 04:02:05 PM new
...but I'd hope such a proceedure wouldn't qualify as 'little surgery' if I switched from the Uncle to the Aunt column.
I wonder if John Bobbitt thought the same thing?
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 25, 2001 05:08:00 AM new
but far from nonsense. Check out any popularization of Godel.
Instead, I checked out my dictionary:
nonˇsense (non'sens) n 1. That which is without sense, or without good sense; esp., words or actions that are meaningless or absurd. 2. Things of no importantance or use; trifles. 3 Foolish or frivolous actions.
Bolding mine.
Hey, I'm giving this my best shot
|
gaffan
|
posted on September 25, 2001 05:35:13 AM new
It is demonstrable that any formal system contains at least one proposition for which the truth cannot be determined within the system. Not nonsense. Godel's Incompletetness Theorem. Very famous. Just ask figmente.
-gaffan-
[email protected]
|
godzillatemple
|
posted on September 25, 2001 05:54:09 AM new
How about this one:
Man is the only animal that sits around discussing what makes him different from all the other animals
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 25, 2001 06:01:41 AM new
From:
http://www.miskatonic.org/godel.html
Gödel showed that provability is a weaker notion than truth, no matter what axiom system is involved ...
The above about sums it up. As stated earlier, we can't prove the sun is going to rise tommorow. But it's a darn good bet it will.
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 25, 2001 06:06:32 AM new
Man is the only animal that sits around discussing what makes him different from all the other animals
Well.... Sometime we stand around doing it. And what about conversing with chimps via sign language?
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 25, 2001 06:07:02 AM new
double post.
[ edited by Microbes on Sep 25, 2001 06:07 AM ]
|
godzillatemple
|
posted on September 25, 2001 06:20:06 AM new
microbes: Note that I didn't say that man "always" sits around doing it, or that he only does it while "sitting". And what does conversing with chimps via sign language have to do with anything? Are you saying that chimps sit around and discuss what makes them different from other animals? If not, then neither am I and you are not arguing with my basic premise. Or are you saying that man sits around discussing with chimps [via sign language] what makes man different from other animals? If so, do you have anything to back that up? The mere fact that man may sit around discussing SOMETHING with chimps does not necessarily imply that he is discussing the intrinsic differrences between man and chimp. Last I heard, "discussions" between man and chimps were limited to such deep topics as "do you want a banana?" and "bad chimp!"
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
|
gaffan
|
posted on September 25, 2001 06:26:34 AM new
Um, I didn't think we were talking about sunrises. I thought we were talking about nonsense.
-gaffan-
[email protected]
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 25, 2001 06:38:03 AM new
Are you saying that chimps sit around and discuss what makes them different from other animals?
Are you saying they don't? If we can teach them one of our languages, what makes you think they might not have a language of their own, and realize they are different from other animals.
http://www.cwu.edu/~cwuchci/quanda.html
It has also been demonstrated that they carry on chimpanzee-to-chimpanzee conversation and sign to themselves when alone."
So what do chimps talk about when alone? Food for thought, if nothing else.
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 25, 2001 06:47:24 AM new
I thought we were talking about nonsense.
Ok... While we can't prove a self contradiction is true or false, it's still a darn good bet that it's utter nonsense. Mathimatical logic says you can't get hit with a bullet if you are running in the same direction as the bullet (if you've never heard this auguement, I'll post it), but evidence say's differnt.
|
gaffan
|
posted on September 25, 2001 07:00:36 AM new
I believe you're making a reference to something which is derivative of Zeno's Paradox disproving the existence of motion. (Diogenese is alleged to have come up with a great response to that -- he listened quietly to Zeno's entire presentation, then without a word stood up and walked away. Unfortunately, they weren't alive at the same time.) (Oops. My apologies to those whose eyes roll back in their heads at each gaffan factoid.)
Again, what that has to do with the contention that "this statement is false" is dismissable as nonsense, rather than someting which points to a bit of a hole in language or logic, is something I'm having difficulty following.
In any case, I think we've demonstrated that the meaning of "nonsense" is arguable (although, of course, I am right and you are wrong ), and therefore not relevent to the thread at hand.
-gaffan-
[email protected]
|
