4 ms·
There's a difference between considering A and not A, and accepting A and not A. In formal logic, one or the other statement must be true. The point being made
by jschwartzi 11y ago
There's a difference between considering A and not A, and accepting A and not A. In formal logic, one or the other statement must be true. The point being made is that we should refrain from choosing the true statement until we've taken the time to consider both on their own merits.
- qznc 11y agoMixing reality and absolute statements seems like a recipe for falsehood. Probabilities work much better. "I'm 50% certain of A and 50% of not-A", which means complete ignorance. A "80% A" means you have an opinion, but you acknowledge a 20% possiblity of being wrong. If anybody claims "100% sure of something", it is an obvious sign of idiocy.
- jes 11y agoWith respect, you seem to be saying that probabilities work better than absolutes, and yet your final sentence seems to be an absolute.
- jschwartzi 11y agoThe purpose of ideal statements is to expose some facet of reality in isolation so that it can be understood. Where people get tripped up is in closing the loop and recognizing that the ideal is never present in isolation. It shows when they ignore details that might make their ideal less valid. They're still useful, though.
- Karunamon 11y agoI am 100% sure that anything measurable exists. Something something Sith, something something absolutes :)
- GFK_of_xmaspast 11y agoOn the other hand, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_excluded_middle#Criticisms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_excluded_middle#Critici...