Prev: WIBBLE WIBBLE WIBBLE
Next: The River Jordan Floods Numbers, the leaders are 6 and 283.
From: John Jones on 30 Mar 2010 08:38
John Stafford wrote:
> John Jones wrote:
>
>> Therefore, a proof ought to be able to distinguish syntax from mere
>> marks on paper. But a proof doesn't do that.
>
> Proofs distinguish nothing. Proofs do nothing. It is not as if a proof
> were animistic. You do that all the time.


A proof doesn't distinguish marks on paper from real, meaningful syntax.
So the problem is, if there is no proof then there is no meaningful
syntax.

THEREFORE, when there is no meaningful syntax, then how could a proof be
applied for it IN THE FIRST PLACE!
From: bigfletch8 on 30 Mar 2010 09:20
On Mar 27, 11:11 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 26, 7:03 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...(a)phiwumbda.org> wrote:

> axioms, including the axioms explaining those axioms, but is logically
> impossible at this time since we cannot yet count to infinity.

"At this time"..."cannot *yet* count to infinity"

And you STILL cannot see the illusion of the mind???


BOfL
From: Frederick Williams on 30 Mar 2010 13:52
Immortalist wrote:

> impossible at this time since we cannot yet count to infinity.

Start at infinity plus one and count backwards.

--
I can't go on, I'll go on.
From: Niklasro(.appspot) on 27 Apr 2010 11:43
On Mar 30, 5:52 pm, Frederick Williams <frederick.willia...(a)tesco.net>
wrote:
> Immortalist wrote:
> > impossible at this time since we cannot yet count to infinity.
>
> Start at infinity plus one and count backwards.
Done! Odd or even?
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: WIBBLE WIBBLE WIBBLE
Next: The River Jordan Floods Numbers, the leaders are 6 and 283.