Someone who actually reads this stuff and understands automatically what you're saying like myself, Takes this as a bunch of Bulls***
Logico-Mathematical Philosophicus 1
Sort:
Feb 18, 2018
0
#3
The use of "big words" does not really make it to where nobody can understand you.
What's your deal, man?
At least it's better than Wittgenstein's Tracticus Logico-Philosophicus
What's your Discord?
Feb 19, 2018
0
#7
Cubronzo napisał:
Certain laws of logic apart from the definitizer which is existence itself described to itself are not logically coherent in-themselves, but depend on the context on which they are predicated. That's why The Scientific Method is outdated.
.....
According to logico-mathematical law unto itself a logical mapping of itself, we must assume that, from the logical perspective, mathematical laws of logic are merely the exponents of coherent/meaningful ad informus (also know as meta-reality, a reality component that a priori asserts itself into existence from nothing).
They can´t be coherent - agreed .. If they come from what you bravely assumed "a reality component arising from nothing" they must contradict themselves at the most advanced point, and get back to the source eventually..
Strong attack you´ve launched here.
Your axes are wrong.
Feb 19, 2018
0
#10
The thinking person should only ask how many chicken sandwiches fit in that cuboid.
president_max wrote:
The thinking person should only ask how many chicken sandwiches fit in that cuboid.
That would actually make for a neat packing problem.
According to logico-mathematical law unto itself a logical mapping of itself, we must assume that, from the logical perspective, mathematical laws of logic are merely the exponents of coherent/meaningful ad informus (also know as meta-reality, a reality component that a priori asserts itself into existence from nothing).
In this sense, mathematics and logic are not a priori components of the fundamental structure of physical reality but merely conceptual abstractions which are taken from the structure of reality which are then impaired to the logical laws of existence (such as the non-contradiction principle). Then again, the abstraction of logical laws is the result of understanding the definitive "form" the objects take to be meaningfully applied to its conceptual substrate.
Certain laws of logic apart from the definitizer which is existence itself described to itself are not logically coherent in-themselves, but depend on the context on which they are predicated. That's why The Scientific Method is outdated.
So I'm not saying that logic and mathematics don't exist. I mean that they are the outputs of certain metaphysical contingencies, not the inputs that produce the potential for the existence of the actual objects in their physical form. Reality is holistic, and can only be conceptualized by a language of its own intrinsic making (all things that are real being imminently part of reality by epistemological definition).