comp.thoery -o + e -o Linearized
in [Math]
|
Prev: atenote
Next: MMM Explains JSH
From: M. Michael Musatov. on 14 Sep 2009 20:11 On Sep 4, 10:58 pm, "Antti J. Ylikoski" <antti.yliko...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > David Bernier kirjoitti: > > > > > Antti J. Ylikoski wrote: > >> -7/9 n n + 1.76666666 + 2/ kirjoitti: > > [...] > > >> Explanation please? > > >> Antti Ylikoski > > >> "It is not the question, who is correct and who is not correct. It is > >> the question, who is the master." -- Slightly modified from Winnie > >> the Pooh. > > > Still, I think sometimes it's a good idea to check that > > the question merits being asked, before actually > > asking it. > > > David Bernier > > That entry was remarkably,extremely obscure. So why would it not merit > to ask for a clarification? There is no reason it should not merit to ask for clarification to any to whom it is not understood this is a universal truth condition Silly.:) > > Antti Ylikoski > Mensa Finland > > Vayiftach HaShem et Peah Ha`Aton What does, 'Vayiftach HaShem et Peah Ha`Aton' mean? Martin Musatov
From: M. Michael Musatov. on 14 Sep 2009 20:15 On Sep 10, 11:11 pm, David Bernier <david...(a)videotron.ca> wrote: > Antti J. Ylikoski wrote: > > David Bernier kirjoitti: > >> Antti J. Ylikoski wrote: > >>> -7/9 n n + 1.76666666 + 2/ kirjoitti: > >> [...] > > >>> Explanation please? > > >>> Antti Ylikoski > > >>> "It is not the question, who is correct and who is not correct. It > >>> is the question, who is the master." -- Slightly modified from > >>> Winnie the Pooh. > > >> Still, I think sometimes it's a good idea to check that > >> the question merits being asked, before actually > >> asking it. > > >> David Bernier > > > That entry was remarkably,extremely obscure. So why would it not merit > > to ask for a clarification? Silly. > > [...] > > Musatov's message > < 5e2bec15-1169-4713-bb4e-b762321f7...(a)l35g2000pra.googlegroups.com > > was remarkably obscure, yes. > > I was referring to your modified quotation: > > "It is not the question, who is correct and who is not correct. It > is the question, who is the master." -- Slightly modified from > Winnie the Pooh. > > If it's based on Lewis Carroll, then I think > "The question is, who is the master?" is more > faithful to the original. > > I took the second sentence as saying: > "It is the question who is the master." > > Suppose the question is: > "Does the past exist?" > > I think philosophers ask questions like that. > > So, some time ago, I began wondering about the nature > of questions, or trying to define or make clear > what a question is ... > > I didn't get far. But in the case of > a question such as: > "Does the past exist?" If it did then it does. Did it? [If I ask then it does so you do not need to respond] the answer is yes. Thank you for answering my question [note: r1 reality, no human response was actually heard, do not print this text in brackets it is for your reference only R2D2] - quick clear cache+ > > I thought that it was worth examining the question, > to check that it merits being asked, before > actually asking it. > > For example, what would a definitive yes/no answer to > "Does the past exist?" change about our understanding of > the world? > > It seems to me that "Does the past exist?" is > a rather fuzzy question ... It existed (presumably) > but isn't in the present. > > So examining the question gives the improved question: > > "Did the past exist?" > > But what past? Suppose: the times of Isaac Newton. > > So I conclude with: > What is a proper question? > > David Bernier
From: Musatov on 14 Sep 2009 20:20
On Sep 10, 11:11 pm, David Bernier <david...(a)videotron.ca> wrote: > Antti J. Ylikoski wrote: > > David Bernier kirjoitti: > >> Antti J. Ylikoski wrote: > >>> -7/9 n n + 1.76666666 + 2/ kirjoitti: > >> [...] > > >>> Explanation please? > > >>> Antti Ylikoski > > >>> "It is not the question, who is correct and who is not correct. It > >>> is the question, who is the master." -- Slightly modified from > >>> Winnie the Pooh. > > >> Still, I think sometimes it's a good idea to check that > >> the question merits being asked, before actually > >> asking it. > > >> David Bernier > > > That entry was remarkably,extremely obscure. So why would it not merit > > to ask for a clarification? Silly. > > [...] > > Musatov's message > < 5e2bec15-1169-4713-bb4e-b762321f7...(a)l35g2000pra.googlegroups.com > > was remarkably obscure, yes. > > I was referring to your modified quotation: > > "It is not the question, who is correct and who is not correct. It > is the question, who is the master." -- Slightly modified from > Winnie the Pooh. > > If it's based on Lewis Carroll, then I think > "The question is, who is the master?" is more > faithful to the original. > > I took the second sentence as saying: > "It is the question who is the master." > > Suppose the question is: > "Does the past exist?" > > I think philosophers ask questions like that. > > So, some time ago, I began wondering about the nature > of questions, or trying to define or make clear > what a question is ... > > I didn't get far. But in the case of > a question such as: > "Does the past exist?" > > I thought that it was worth examining the question, > to check that it merits being asked, before > actually asking it. > > For example, what would a definitive yes/no answer to > "Does the past exist?" change about our understanding of > the world? > > It seems to me that "Does the past exist?" is > a rather fuzzy question ... It existed (presumably) > but isn't in the present. > > So examining the question gives the improved question: > > "Did the past exist?" The answer includes did I ask the question as a [statement] proceed to internal memory check bank [p1: replay-- the answer is yes the past exists: human asked question so answer outside of bracket yes after bracket say it = yes ] it = yes > > But what past? Suppose: the times of Isaac Newton. > > So I conclude with: > What is a proper question? > > David Bernier JZ - (aka my best friend in first grade) proceed minus captcha coe - evirr |