Title: doublethink
Now that I've had the time leisure to look deeper into Nagarjuna (http://www.smith.edu/philosophy/jgarfieldnlt.html), paraconsistent logic (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-paraconsistent/), and inconsistent mathematics (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mathematics
joanna == joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
joanna Trust me; he _is_ the only worthwhile philosopher I've
joanna encountered in the twentieth century.
You should really, really read Marilyn Frye's citeThe Politics of
Reality/cite.
Kendall Clark
--
Jazz is only what you are. -- Louis
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please correct me if I am wrong.
I thought you wanted to stop the discussion, Ecclesiastes.
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34616] Re: doublethink
no, I only wanted to stop the discussion if the concept of paraconsistent logic remained undefined, vague, confusing, etc., with no specific example of any sort.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 9:32 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:34619] RE: Re: doublethink
no, I only wanted to stop the discussion if the concept of paraconsistent
logic remained undefined, vague, confusing
At 05:11 PM 02/11/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Sorry about linear algebra. You didn't find eigenvectors beautiful?
No, but it may have had to do with my math teacher, he seemed to be
sleeping through the class too.
Joanna
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34622] Re: RE: Re: doublethink
I wrote:
no, I only wanted to stop the discussion if the concept of paraconsistent
logic remained undefined, vague, confusing, etc., with no specific example
of any sort.
Ian writes:
And I provided the list -including you- with a set
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1) A great truth is a truth whose opposite is also a great truth. - Niels
Bohr
That's right. It's extremely unclear what Bohr was saying. For all we know,
he may be totally wrongheaded in the above statement. We can't
If you don't know what
Russell's paradox is I'll take the liberty of asking
that you look it up as it's one of the most
important results of 20th century mathematics-logic.
Feel free to refuse.
Alternatively, Ian, you could carry out the task of
looking up problems for all and only all
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alternatively, Ian, you could carry out the task of
looking up problems for all and only all those
listmembers who won't look them up for themselves :-)
dd
===
:-)
Ian
Ian Murray wrote:
snipping, because I detect, possibly erroneously, obtuseness on your
part. If you don't know what Russell's paradox is I'll take the
liberty of asking that you look it up as it's one of the most
important results of 20th century mathematics-logic. Feel free to
refuse.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you don't know what
Russell's paradox is I'll take the liberty of asking
that you look it up as it's one of the most
important results of 20th century mathematics-logic.
Feel free to refuse.
Alternatively, Ian, you could carry out the task of
ravi wrote:
on the paradox, my potentially incorrect attempt at summarizing the
history and details:
Isn't it the same as the Cretan Liar paradox.
The Cretan says, all statements made by Cretans are false.
I don't know the exact history -- but Russell's discovery must have been
the
Forget Russell, read Wittgenstein. The Philosophical Investigations is a
real treat.
What I love about Wittgenstein is that he writes about very difficult
things in very simple languageas opposed to most philosophers, who
write about very simple things in very impenetrable language. At the
joanna bujes wrote:
Forget Russell, read Wittgenstein. The Philosophical Investigations is a
real treat.
i believe wittgenstein's cambridge lectures on the foundations of
mathematics might also be an interesting read in this matter. of
particular interest is the tussle between the hard-nosed
- Original Message -
From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 3:12 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:34577] Re: Re: Re: Re: doublethink
Forget Russell, read Wittgenstein. The Philosophical Investigations is a
real treat.
What I love about
At 06:28 PM 02/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
but the russell that ian recommends we read is not the philosopher of
logical atomism or atheism or the silliness of marriage ;-). the
development of the formalization of mathematics triggered by frege
(peano et al) in the late 19th century and brought to
Carrol Cox wrote:
ravi wrote:
on the paradox, my potentially incorrect attempt at summarizing the
history and details:
Isn't it the same as the Cretan Liar paradox.
The Cretan says, all statements made by Cretans are false.
I don't know the exact history -- but Russell's discovery must
Sorry about linear algebra. You didn't find eigenvectors beautiful?
Peter
joanna bujes wrote:
I only like math because it's beautiful and elegant, but I have no
desire (and probably no ability) to understand why it is so. I
made it through Calculus and vector calculus...was bored to
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(This discussion is going in extremely abstract circles. Either it should
stop here
=
Hey, given your opening Ari-logic prescription, you're right. Because I'm not
writing a book for the list on the list.
On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Peter Dorman wrote:
Sorry about linear algebra. You didn't find
eigenvectors beautiful?
Peter
I was always told that there were two ways to learn
linear algebra; the hard way and the easy way. And the
easy way doesn't work.
dd
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ian replies: He invites us to explore that which is neither irrational nor
embraces the law of non-contradiction and the law of the excluded middle. To
the extent those issues make contact [with] d-t, via associative
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34524] Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: doublethink
Ian had written :He [Nagarjuna] invites us to explore that which is neither irrational nor embraces the law of non-contradiction and the law of the excluded middle. To the extent those issues make contact [with] d-t [i.e
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34468] Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: doublethink
Ian: Nagarjuna was arguably the first philosopher to systematically explore and *break* with the limits of the applicability of the law of non-contradiction and the implications for ontology and epistemology.
me: so he ... embraces
Title: doublethink
[was: RE: [PEN-L:34449] Re: Re: Re: a slip of the Fox noose]
Doug: I hate to deploy Fitzgerald's cliche once again, but I guess it
became a cliche because there are so many illustrations of the
principle: The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability
ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the
ability to function.
Ian: The brain has simultaneity problems in a big way
[neurobiologist William
Calvin]
didn't Orwell define doublethink as the ability to hold onto two
contradictory ideas at the same time without seeing
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34458] Re: doublethink
the cited paper starts by saying Nagarjuna is surely one of the most difficult philosophers to interpret in any tradition. His texts are terse and cryptic.
Ian, your stuff is often terse and cryptic. Are you saying that Nagarjuna is engaging
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 1:25 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:34459] RE: Re: doublethink
the cited paper starts by saying Nagarjuna is surely one of the most
difficult philosophers to interpret in any tradition
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34461] Re: RE: Re: doublethink
Ian: Nagarjuna was arguably the first philosopher to systematically explore and
*break* with the limits of the applicability of the law of non-contradiction
and the implications for ontology and epistemology.
so he or she embraces double
Devine, James wrote:
On the other hand, more of a Marx-style contradiction would occur if there weren't
enough seats in the stadium for all the people, so that there's an inherent conflict
over the distribution of seats that can't be solved via why can't we just get
along? (i.e., figuring
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34466] Antagonistic and Non-Antagonistic contradictions, was Re: doublethink
somewhere in one of my many unpublished manuscripts, I also link the coordination problem to non-antagonistic contradictions, on the other hand, and structural conflict to antagonistic ones
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ian: Nagarjuna was arguably the first philosopher to systematically
explore and
*break* with the limits of the applicability of the law of
non-contradiction
and the implications for ontology and epistemology.
so he or
Title: Orwell/doublethink/Iraq
Triumph of doublethink in 2003
Orwell warned against the kind of lies we are being fed about Iraq
Paul Foot
Wednesday January 1, 2003
The Guardian [U.K.]
This year, I suppose, for many of us will be George Orwell year. He was born in 1903, and died
33 matches
Mail list logo
