Language and thought - Page 6

Ted Striker · March 18, 2003, 02:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
This is another example against most philosophy debates.

Half the time the philosophers use weird non-standard definitions and entire debates are born over it.

Ya, it gives me a headache.

Sorry guys I am not threadjacking just putting a little aside in here.

The Vagabond · March 18, 2003, 02:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

If so, you bring the discussion to a completely different level. Then what is out there in lieu of objective reality?

Ah, a matter after my own heart

.

Since there is no objective reality everything is simply a subjective reality, individualized to each mind. It probably isn't the same reality to other minds (if they truly exist at all).

So your philosophical credo is solipsism, Imran?

Ramo · March 18, 2003, 02:44

Quote:

If so, you bring the discussion to a completely different level. Then what is out there in lieu of objective reality?

A subjective reality, of course. [Assuming non-contradiction,] there is no absolute truth.

Ted Striker · March 18, 2003, 02:45

I like that guy that spend his whole life in a bathtub.

I should do that, me and Nicole Neuman travelling around in an mf'ing jacuzzi. That's what I'm talking about.

The Vagabond · March 18, 2003, 02:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo

A subjective reality, of course. [Assuming non-contradiction,] there is no absolute truth.

Is this subjective reality different from human to human?

Imran Siddiqui · March 18, 2003, 02:46

Quote:

I go by how things are defined

You've obviously never been in a capitalism vs. communism debate where the main points in the debate center on the REAL meaning of 'liberty' and 'freedom'.

Quote:

So your philosophical credo is solipsism, Imran?

Not quite

. Though sometimes I shift there. I'm much more Nietzchian in outlook.

Asher · March 18, 2003, 02:48

I don't do capitalism vs communism debates, because they're incredibly stupid.

Like this one.

I made the mistake of getting sucked into it -- I forgot how terrible it is to argue with the social sciences where the definitions of things change at the convenience of a position.

Ted Striker · March 18, 2003, 02:49

You gotta get a jacuzzi like me player.

Ramo · March 18, 2003, 02:50

Quote:

Is this subjective reality different from human to human?

Sure. There's no reason why it can't be.

Asher · March 18, 2003, 02:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
You gotta get a jacuzzi like me player.

Oh I have one, it's just that it's always full with my *****es, ya know.

Ted Striker · March 18, 2003, 02:52

Man, don't say that too loud Infatplayeration might here it and get mad you are being a bigger player than he is.

I want to get Agent Reyes in this Jacuzzi.

Ted Striker · March 18, 2003, 02:53

Oops sorry guys back on topic, I'll be in the mf'ing hottub.

The Vagabond · March 18, 2003, 02:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Sure. There's no reason why it can't be.

Very well. Then you are a solipsist. Congrats.

Ramo · March 18, 2003, 02:56

Quote:

Oh I have one, it's just that it's always full with my *****es, ya know.

Sure. Pimping ain't easy...

Ramo · March 18, 2003, 02:59

Quote:

Very well. Then you are a solipsist. Congrats.

Yep.

The Vagabond · March 18, 2003, 03:06

Asher, I dug out the following fragment of your discussion. The innermost quote is by Agathon, which is followed by your reply.

Quote:

In either case mathematics is not wholly conventional. The symbolism we use to express mathematical statements is conventional but the truths they express are not.

Again, you should figure out what mathematics is.

Now you seem pretty much to agree with this quote, but back then you seemed to disagree.

Asher · March 18, 2003, 03:08

I don't see me saying I disagree with anything he said.

That quote is just telling him to go look up what mathematics means. Mathematics doesn't contain the "truths they express", by the definition of it, which is why I told him to find out what mathematics is.

The entire time he misunderstood my position because he assumed some weird, non-standard definition of mathematics. And the entire time I kept telling him that's not what mathematics is defined as, but he kept going and complaining whenever I ignored all the irrelevant tangents he shot off into...

Ben Kenobi · March 18, 2003, 03:13

Agathon:

Quote:

Do you think there is such a thing as an untranslatable language?

Yes.

Don't we have some already that we have lost all conceptual connections? Linear B, I believe.

In order to translate, we require someone with footings in two languages. Over time, unless one can find some script, how could we translate both languages?

However, this would be untranslatable in the sense that we should be able to understand, but current conditions prevent us from doing so.

I guess, I would rephrase your question. Are there any languages that have always been, and will remain untranslatable?

The Vagabond · March 18, 2003, 03:13

Anyway, Asher, don't be so bitter about it. It has been a nice discussion.

Asher · March 18, 2003, 03:14

Quote:

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Anyway, Asher, don't be so bitter about it. It has been a nice discussion.

It was absolutely dreadful.

tinyp3nis · March 18, 2003, 09:05

It seems to me that Asher, you are (or were) pretty much confusing math with physics.
Most your points of how philosophy in University is useless, would also make you to think that pure mathematics is also.