Does inductive reasoning lead to knowledge?
in [Logic]
|
From: Patricia Aldoraz on 23 Dec 2009 02:59 On Dec 23, 5:35 pm, Michael Gordge <mikegor...(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > On Dec 23, 9:59 am, Patricia Aldoraz <patricia.aldo...(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > You have always been a confused fool. There is no mention of mind..... > > Hey dopey, subjective means total dependence on the mind, ewe know, No, it doesn't as ewe don't know. It means different things in different contexts. Have you always been as big an idiot as you seem?
From: Michael Gordge on 23 Dec 2009 03:33 On Dec 23, 4:59 pm, Patricia Aldoraz <patricia.aldo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > No, it doesn't as ewe don't know. It means different things in > different contexts. What? are ewe drunk? Which dictionary did ewe find that garbage in? Did ewe ask your lawyer or is he a Kantian too? MG
From: Keth on 23 Dec 2009 03:45 On Dec 23, 8:51 am, Patricia Aldoraz <patricia.aldo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 23, 2:43 pm, Keth <kethiswo...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Causation has strict order, > > Not really, or not that it is so obvious. A set of table legs can > cause a table to be very stable, but they do not somehow act in prior > time. Four legs are not the cause of the stableness of table, the real cause is the physical force corresponding to the structure of the table. When one pushes the table, a force is generated towards the other direction, which generates a counter-force by the legs on the other side. All these forces take time to reach equilibrium. Use flexible material for the legs and we can actually observe the time it takes to reach the equilibrium. With legs of rigid material, the forces reach equilibrium almost instantly. The underlying causation is force. And the action of force takes time. Force A -> effect B is a time delayed causation. I thought this is common knowledge. > > One exception to the rule is logical causation and mathematical > > causation, > There is no such thing, you have invented these terms. > > > which does not involve time. Logical and mathematical > > causation are formative translations. For example, 2+2=4 and AUB=BUA > > do not involve time. Strictly speaking these are not causation since > > there is no time delay. > > This is a confusion of thought. They are piling up. Logical and mathematical transformations are often used in deduction method as if they are causation during the calculation process. Where is the confusion?
From: Michael Gordge on 23 Dec 2009 03:51 On Dec 23, 4:59 pm, Patricia Aldoraz <patricia.aldo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 23, 5:35 pm, Michael Gordge <mikegor...(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > > > Hey dopey, subjective means total dependence on the mind, ewe know, > > No, it doesn't as ewe don't know. It means different things in > different contexts. Ewe do realize dont ewe, idiot, that a word / concept meaning anything (different things) has no meaning of its own? > Have you always been as big an idiot as you seem? On the contrary, an idiot is the person whose dopey Kantian ideology forbids her to explain 'the' meaning of the concept subjective, try again. MG
From: Patricia Aldoraz on 23 Dec 2009 04:15
On Dec 23, 6:52 pm, Monsieur Turtoni <turt...(a)fastmail.net> wrote: > Patricia Aldoraz wrote: > > (snip) > "I despise" > (snip) > > Considering the fact that you appear to be the Bulldyke of Usenet it's > no wonder! See how a few insults brings cockroaches like you out? Plus, your remark is not even close to sensible. If you are not quoting someone, you are completely lost, aren't you? |