Dubstepforum.com

... just human failure in applying logic

as far as i can remember, i could solve all those that i met and understood (as in not requiring scientifical knowledge i don't have) .
but my memory is far from perfect and my knowledge limited, so challange me, i need to test my own claim!

God

definition of trolling

more of a troll is the one who asked for a paradox drops a trolling accusation

i urge many of you to head to the definiotion of paradox before posting here, or you risk to fall under the definition of ignorant or troll, as in bass hertz's case

fighting for peace?

2manynoobs wrote:fighting for peace?

that's an oximoron, if i remember correctly the term, not a paradox
so many people use this word quite frequently but so few know what it means apparently

alien pimp wrote:

2manynoobs wrote:fighting for peace?

that's an oximoron, if i remember correctly the term, not a paradox
so many people use this word quite frequently but so few know what it means apparently

lol, I actually studied the definition of paradox 2 years ago in school, and they gave fighting for peace as an example. So you're claiming they are wrong?

"A dog growls when it's angry, and wags its tale when it's pleased. Now I growl when I'm pleased and wag my tale when I'm angry."
(The Cheshire Cat in Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland)

2manynoobs wrote:

alien pimp wrote:

2manynoobs wrote:fighting for peace?

that's an oximoron, if i remember correctly the term, not a paradox
so many people use this word quite frequently but so few know what it means apparently

lol, I actually studied the definition of paradox 2 years ago in school, and they gave fighting for peace as an example. So you're claiming they are wrong?

"A dog growls when it's angry, and wags its tale when it's pleased. Now I growl when I'm pleased and wag my tale when I'm angry."
(The Cheshire Cat in Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland)

they were wrong, even though i see now in english it has wider meanings, i only go by 2c here:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paradox

and here's your fight for peace:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/oxymoron

This statement is false.

alien pimp wrote:

2manynoobs wrote:

alien pimp wrote:

2manynoobs wrote:fighting for peace?

that's an oximoron, if i remember correctly the term, not a paradox
so many people use this word quite frequently but so few know what it means apparently

lol, I actually studied the definition of paradox 2 years ago in school, and they gave fighting for peace as an example. So you're claiming they are wrong?

"A dog growls when it's angry, and wags its tale when it's pleased. Now I growl when I'm pleased and wag my tale when I'm angry."
(The Cheshire Cat in Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland)

they were wrong, even though i see now in english it has wider meanings, i only go by 2c here:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paradox

and here's your fight for peace:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/oxymoron

ah yes I get it now.
A paradox is a whole statement, idea (a few sentences explaining an idea). And the whole idea or way of thinking is perhaps right although it seems like there's something wrong because of our limited human logic.
And an oxymoron is actually just most of the time one simple sentence, containing a few words that have opposite characters or refer to things that have opposite characters. Yet the statement held by the sentence itself is true.

Nice to clear this up alien pimp.

collige wrote:This statement is false.

this falls under the definition
and it gets solved by remembering a statement's value of truth can't be verified from its own source, that's why we need other people to make our id's, witnesses and proof in court, and that's why i can't believe when god says he's all good, because the book says he's the originator of everything we know, so there is no other independent party to ask, so he can be actually satan fooling us

2manynoobs wrote:A paradox is a whole statement, idea (a few sentences explaining an idea). And the whole idea or way of thinking leads ONLY to self-contradictory conclusions.

fixed

as in your example:
if the statement is true - then it's true that is false - can't happen same time
but thinking a tiny bit outside the box you just reject the idea of judging self-referring statements about the truth value because they never are any helpful whatsoever, for the reasons explained above
glad to be helpful

alien pimp wrote:... just human failure in applying logic

I agree that this is the case, whether it's scientific or in the more general sense of things. Paradoxes arise when we have insufficient information/knowledge to probe or frame a statement or idea fully.

kay wrote:

alien pimp wrote:... just human failure in applying logic

I agree that this is the case, whether it's scientific or in the more general sense of things. Paradoxes arise when we have insufficient information/knowledge to probe or frame a statement or idea fully.

or enough mastering of logic, because you can have paradoxes that are self-sufficient information wise, likethe one with the turtle and pericle (if that was the guy, don't remember precisely)

this is some next dickhead ting

kay wrote:re: Alien Pimp's human failure in applying logic:


Paradoxes arise when we have insufficient experience to explore the expression of an idea fully.

there are no such thing as a paradoxes
is clearly paradoxical
because the experience of ideas
will, presumably, never be fully expressed.
however the insufficiency of attempts to describe a particular idea
is as logically unparadoxical as
is an irrepressible curiosity for what comes next.

Thus this urge to lift anchors,
those pinning us to moment,
there shed the nascent and
farewell what's about to happen.


the idea metamorphosising

schroedingers feline?

64hz wrote:schroedingers feline?

this was about some quantum biz and it was solved, right?
i don't remeber the details, just it was about some complicated mechs and mambo-jumbo about nothing after all...

if you could sum it up in a few simple sentences i'll most probably figure it out, if not i might not have the scientific expertise to solve it
try me out though...

alien pimp wrote:

2manynoobs wrote:fighting for peace?

that's an oximoron, if i remember correctly the term, not a paradox
so many people use this word quite frequently but so few know what it means apparently

I would disagree with 'fighting for peace' being an oxymoron. The phrase 'fighting for peace' contains nothing that could be considered oxymoronic (e.g. 'a capitalist communist'). 'fighting for peace' must be considered paradoxical because of the means contradicting the aim. Certainly not oxymoronic as far as I can conceive.