Does inductive reasoning lead to knowledge?
in [Logic]
|
From: Michael Gordge on 8 Jan 2010 16:19 On Jan 8, 11:56 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Ah, so since there are no lines in reality, Euclid's diverging lines are purely imagined, begin there, they are not real, these imagined lines take an imagined journey of infinity, without end and without direction, and then one has to petend that there's a half-way point on this purely imagined journey of infinity, and you want people to believe these lines just magically whimsically change in direction and therefore change in meaning from diverging to converging? And you want to be taken seriously? MG
From: PD on 8 Jan 2010 16:28 On Jan 8, 3:19 pm, Michael Gordge <mikegor...(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > On Jan 8, 11:56 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Ah, so since there are no lines in reality, > > Euclid's diverging lines are purely imagined, begin there, they are > not real, these imagined lines take an imagined journey of infinity, > without end and without direction, and then one has to petend that > there's a half-way point on this purely imagined journey of infinity, > and you want people to believe these lines just magically whimsically > change in direction and therefore change in meaning from diverging to > converging? And so is Euclid's Fifth Postulate a postulate or not? This is a yes or no question. Please make a check mark in the appropriate place: ___ yes ___ no > > And you want to be taken seriously? Not at the moment. At the moment, I'm talking to a lunatic for entertainment. Not serious business at all.
From: Michael Gordge on 8 Jan 2010 16:38 On Jan 9, 6:26 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: Desperate strawman garbage snipped, you haven't answered, can you be certain of anything? MG
From: Michael Gordge on 8 Jan 2010 16:43 On Jan 9, 6:28 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > And so is Euclid's Fifth Postulate a postulate or not? You have got my answer. MG
From: dorayme on 8 Jan 2010 16:48
In article <hi7fsu72e0n(a)news1.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > dorayme wrote: > > In article <hi4v5i92i43(a)news5.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> > > wrote: > > > >> Patricia Aldoraz wrote: > >>> On Jan 6, 9:38 am, John Stafford <n...(a)droffats.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Methinks PD is a mathematician in which axiomatic certainty can occur. > >>> Axioms do not reside in mathematicians, they reside in systems. > >> Oh, good grief. You don't even have high school math in your > >> background. > >> > > > > You are becoming quite a specialist at cowardly one line responses to > > posts by me and others, is this to hide the great analytical skills you > > boasted about recently? Do you ever have really good reasons for your > > views? > > > So you don't know what axioms are either? > When you learn to quote, you will become more qualified to make these sarcastic remarks. I, dorayme, do know, as well as any one here what an axiom is. It is not a particularly mysterious affair. There are interesting questions about them in various contexts but there is no point in talking about it with unforthcoming cowards and twits like you and Clarke. http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html -- dorayme |