What is addition?
in [Logic]
|
Prev: Are each of us one self or a bunch of clones that produce the belief/dimension that we are the same self?
Next: CLICK CLICK
From: John Jones on 18 May 2010 22:10 "2 + 2 = 4" does not express a truth, it expresses a pattern (such as two by two re-patterns to four by one). The whole pattern is given. There is no truth about it. Addition is not a function that is followed by an outcome. It is a means to express at least two ways of looking at patterns. The pattern is given. On the other hand, "2 + 2" says nothing. It does not express a pattern, nor is it a function, for a function has an outcome. The addition sign that is used in "2 + 2" plays a different role to the addition sign in "2 + 2 = 4". Amen.
From: Shrikeback on 19 May 2010 02:41 On May 18, 8:05 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...(a)peoplepc.com> wrote: > > "2 + 2 = 4" does not express a truth, it expresses a pattern (such as > > two by two re-patterns to four by one). > > WOW! > > That's profound! > > How long did it take for you to think that up? Wow. That's a profound heckle. How long did it take you to think it up? And why did you censor the header? Oh well, don't worry. He's not here to feed the trolls, he's here to troll the feeds. Your replies will splat against his windshield of apathy.
From: Zerkon on 19 May 2010 11:13 On Wed, 19 May 2010 03:10:16 +0100, John Jones wrote: > "2 + 2 = 4" does not express a truth, it expresses a pattern (such as > two by two re-patterns to four by one). The whole pattern is given. > There is no truth about it. Which then would apply to this and all posts and all forms of learned communication as also being whole patterns given. Correctness (if not truth) is established by mutual human agreement. 2+2 must be recognized by a human capable of seeing the pattern which then is said to express. > "2 + 2" says nothing. It does not express a pattern, Therefore it says something.
From: John Stafford on 19 May 2010 12:10 In article <pan.2010.05.19.15.13.54(a)erkonx.net>, Zerkon <Z(a)erkonx.net> wrote: > On Wed, 19 May 2010 03:10:16 +0100, John Jones wrote: > > > "2 + 2 = 4" does not express a truth, it expresses a pattern (such as > > two by two re-patterns to four by one). The whole pattern is given. > > There is no truth about it. > > Which then would apply to this and all posts and all forms of learned > communication as also being whole patterns given. Correctness (if not > truth) is established by mutual human agreement. 2+2 must be recognized > by a human capable of seeing the pattern which then is said to express. > > > "2 + 2" says nothing. It does not express a pattern, > > Therefore it says something. Mr. Jones, if there is any human enterprise that has truth, it is mathematics. Once proven, a theorem becomes TRUTH. It is how mathematics must work, from proof to proof.
From: heptangular on 19 May 2010 15:02
On May 18, 9:10 pm, John Jones <jonescard...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > "2 + 2 = 4" does not express a truth, it expresses a pattern (such as > two by two re-patterns to four by one). The whole pattern is given. > There is no truth about it. > > Addition is not a function that is followed by an outcome. It is a means > to express at least two ways of looking at patterns. The pattern is given.. > > On the other hand, "2 + 2" says nothing. It does not express a pattern, > nor is it a function, for a function has an outcome. The addition sign > that is used in "2 + 2" plays a different role to the addition sign in > "2 + 2 = 4". Amen. Quantitative systems, like other formal schemes, can feature absolutes. It's the one context where they're legit, just as a common trade like plumbing has its axiomatic conventions and requirements for conducting work operations and the manufacturing of parts. Go against the "certainties" of fact and procedure established in a specific profession and get accused of irresponsibility eventually. Whether or not the world outside of invented human systems has "truths" and "absolutes" is a different (potential) waste of time issue. |