Well, A Sign Of Intelligence!

[Qfwfq]

I know. I'd encourage you to go even deeper.

Not in discussing Dick's stuff and I doubt you'd get my points anyway, even if I were already able to lay them out satisfactorily.

 

You can view it as an analysis about QM; what definitions need to be made for QM terminology to arise as a reference to our expectations.

You can view this way, I don't. Neither was I expecting his stuff to be an alternative. What I meant is simply that he adds nothing to understanding, knowledge nor whatever of value. As for what I said about "the quest", it was referred to you claiming his stuff helps to solve the problems of quantum physics. I said that you only sweep dust under the carpet and that's what I think.

[Rade]

So I would modify your original equation, and put forward "A = B" as the real trump!

Sorry it has taken me so long to reply, lost track of thread. Yes, A=B is the essence of science and mathematics, two ways to gain knowledge, but my point is that one cannot begin to explain or gain knowledge of anything such as clay, including explanation itself, until first it is accepted as an analytical truth that:

(1) A=A (clay = clay)

(2) B=B (soil type = soil type)

 

only then,

(3) A=B (clay = soil type)

 

So, in your example,both A=A and B=B trump A=B.

 

It is useful to start philosophy with a tautology (A=A) because the only other logical option (A~=A), [read A does not equal A] would be its negation, which is logically a contradiction. Also, from the notion of tautology can be derived two essential concepts for science, implication and equivalent. Any argument A -> B [read A implies B] or any claim that A <-> B [read A is equivalent to B] is logically true only if you begin with a tautology (A=A).

 

So, if we accept that all philosophy discussion must begin with tautology and not contradiction, then we see the great importance of tautology when we attempt to answer the question, 'what exists? Thus, what exists = what exists, which has been restated as Existence Exists by Ayn Rand (note that DoctorDick uses the expression..'what is, is, what is']. This was first expressed by Aristotle 2000+ years ago, where we read in his Metaphysics, BkVII,Ch16)..."the fact that a thing is itself is the single reason and the single cause to be given in answer to all such questions as 'why the man is man'..."

 

There is beauty in the symmetry of the fundamental tautology, Existence Exists, because it can be used to develop a complete and internally self sufficient philosophy worthy of humans to follow.

 

Note: It is my position that the Fundamental Equation of DoctorDick, derives from the more Fundamental Tautology of Aristotle [a thing is itself, or restated, A=A].

[pljames]

I am no intellectual, but didn't Einstein (daydream E=MC2)? Where's the rational understand for that? A picture is worth a thousand words. Pictures have no semantics grammar words. I love the spoken phrase "is it Houseton or Houston". Language screws up understanding. If the mind cannot be seen of felt how is it we use the word (mind)? We see and feel our brain, but not our mind and cannot explain what consciousness is. What might be rational to you might not be to me, as we both are individuals with different prospects of our interpretation of the word rational by our language standard.Paul

[Rade]

but didn't Einstein (daydream E=MC2)?

No, the equation was one of the consequences of rational thinking he conducted about his prior electrodynamics paper.

Where's the rational understand for that?

Read his paper in 1905 titled..Does the inertia of a body depend on its energy content?.

Pictures have no semantics grammar words.

False. Early human pictures (used by pictographic text of Oriental cultures) are pictures that denote language...words.

Language screws up understanding.

A conclusion reached only if you think that the primary purpose of language is communication. The primary purpose of language is to provide each individual human a system of cognitive classification and organization' date=' which then allows one to acquire knowledge and thus understanding (e.g., facts of reality) on an unlimited scale.

What might be rational to you might not be to me

Clearly, either we both hold that the human mind is the only guide for our actions and how we make judgements of values (rational), or not (irrational). Rationality is the recognition of the fact that existence exists as an axiom of thinking. Those that do not have such recognition act irrationally. Are you rational, I know that I am ?