• Lucid Dreaming - Dream Views




    Results 1 to 9 of 9
    Like Tree3Likes
    • 2 Post By stormcrow
    • 1 Post By tommo

    Thread: The greatest logic to ever be yet!

    1. #1
      Banned
      Join Date
      Feb 2010
      LD Count
      31
      Gender
      Location
      Salt Lake City, UT
      Posts
      639
      Likes
      63

      The greatest logic to ever be yet!

      Hello everyone,

      This is the greatest logic to have ever been because of its relation to "knowing" something, it is the greatest because it is presumed that from this logic, there should absolutely 0 things that you should "know" or you do not get this logic. Thus it is a huge logic concerning science and philosophy.

      Here is the logic:

      "If you know something, but you do not know of something that proves it wrong, then you can not know that first thing."

      So far there has not been a logic that provides a method of finding out if there is a reason or not that disproves a statement, thus it is very hard to know something.

    2. #2
      Dionysian stormcrow's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2010
      LD Count
      About 1 a week
      Gender
      Location
      Cirith Ungol
      Posts
      895
      Likes
      482
      DJ Entries
      3
      I know I exist. I cannot prove this to be invalid because the only possible condition in which I could be wrong, is if I do not exist. If I do not exist then I would not be able to pose the question of my existence in the first place so I necessarily exist if I can pose the question. I can pose the question. I know I exist.

      Nhuc and yost like this.

    3. #3
      Member Achievements:
      Created Dream Journal Referrer Bronze 5000 Hall Points Tagger First Class Populated Wall Veteran First Class
      Arra's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 2011
      Posts
      3,838
      Likes
      3886
      DJ Entries
      50
      Quote Originally Posted by elucid View Post
      "If you know something, but you do not know of something that proves it wrong, then you can not know that first thing."
      Can you explain further? I don't understand why this statement is taken to be true. If I'm not mistaken, this is the argument:

      I know A
      There is nothing that proves A false
      ----
      Therefore, I do not know A

      It's just... invalid. There must be something I'm not seeing. Someone enlighten me?

    4. #4
      Dionysian stormcrow's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2010
      LD Count
      About 1 a week
      Gender
      Location
      Cirith Ungol
      Posts
      895
      Likes
      482
      DJ Entries
      3
      I'm not necessarily sure if he means formal logic. The way he is using the word, it seems to me that he is using the word logic as a placeholder for "a particular way of thinking", although he is inferencing into the truth value of a proposition so maybe he might be referring to formal logic idk. Some clarification would be nice. I just typed the first proposition that I felt would not meet the conditions for his "theory of knowledge".

    5. #5
      Member Achievements:
      Created Dream Journal Referrer Bronze 5000 Hall Points Tagger First Class Populated Wall Veteran First Class
      Arra's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 2011
      Posts
      3,838
      Likes
      3886
      DJ Entries
      50
      Oh, okay. I assumed it must make some sense I didn't see, since you responded with a counterexample.

    6. #6
      D.V. Editor-in-Chief Original Poster's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2006
      LD Count
      Lucid Now
      Gender
      Location
      3D
      Posts
      8,263
      Likes
      4135
      DJ Entries
      11
      So basically the OP is saying a truly wise man knows nothing. Thanks Socrates, glad we finally got the verdict on that one.

      Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.


    7. #7
      DuB
      DuB is offline
      Distinct among snowflakes DuB's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 2005
      Gender
      Posts
      2,399
      Likes
      358
      So basically this is what you were saying back in this thread.

      I was confused by this proposition back then and I'm confused by it now. It flatly just does not make sense. You start with premises A and B, and somehow conclude not-A. It's just not a valid logical conclusion, plain and simple. It is at best self-contradictory (you start by assuming A and conclude with not-A) and more probably is just nonsense (how does the conclusion of not-A even derive from the premises A and B at all??). Unfortunately I have to repeat my first response from a year ago: try harder.

    8. #8
      LD's this year: ~7 tommo's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 2007
      Gender
      Location
      Melbourne
      Posts
      9,202
      Likes
      4986
      DJ Entries
      7
      Why are there like buttons in here now?
      Dianeva likes this.

    9. #9
      Banned
      Join Date
      Feb 2010
      LD Count
      31
      Gender
      Location
      Salt Lake City, UT
      Posts
      639
      Likes
      63
      I know I exist. I cannot prove this to be invalid because the only possible condition in which I could be wrong, is if I do not exist. If I do not exist then I would not be able to pose the question of my existence in the first place so I necessarily exist if I can pose the question. I can pose the question. I know I exist.
      Glad you even made an example, here is the application of that logic in this paragraph, basically it is saying that since you do "not" know of a reason you do not exist, then you can not logically say that you do because you assumed your existence based on some reason.

      Can you explain further? I don't understand why this statement is taken to be true. If I'm not mistaken, this is the argument:
      Basically, it is saying that for a statement that you have, if you do "not know" a reason that it is false, then you do not know that it is true as well because knowing that it is "true" means that you know that there is not a reason to prove it false "and" that there is a reason proving it true, both at the same time.

      I'm not necessarily sure if he means formal logic.
      yes, I mean formal logic. Getting this means that you got the logic.

      I was confused by this proposition back then and I'm confused by it now. It flatly just does not make sense. You start with premises A and B, and somehow conclude not-A. It's just not a valid logical conclusion, plain and simple. It is at best self-contradictory (you start by assuming A and conclude with not-A)
      Yes, I have had some problems with people understanding the logic, but once understood, it is really hard to get out of, of course because it is purely reason and logic.

      I can try harder at explaining it, the first problem is that it "knows" something at first and then refutes it with the next sentence, but it can also be said in this way that to know something, you have to know of a "reason" for that thing or else it is just making a statement by itself and no "proof". Therefore from this you go on to say that if there is a "reason" that exists that proves it false, then that statement is false because it is "disproved" but since we "do not know" that the counter reason exist or not, but know of its affect that if it exists, then our statement is false, if it does not then our statement is true and if we "do not know" then where do we stand in our first statement.

      And yes this statement is self-contradictory which is the glory of it which by knowing this "one" thing, you know "nothing" which is understandable with this logic even though you should know one thing from this logic.



      Let me know if I need to try harder at explaining it.
      Last edited by elucid; 12-14-2011 at 04:43 AM.

    Similar Threads

    1. Greatest LD feeling?
      By Codename in forum General Lucid Discussion
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: 03-23-2011, 11:22 PM
    2. I am the greatest guitarist EVER.
      By Patmandoo in forum Senseless Banter
      Replies: 62
      Last Post: 02-13-2008, 01:38 AM
    3. Greatest dream I have ever had
      By Vercetti in forum General Dream Discussion
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: 01-14-2008, 02:35 PM
    4. Who is the greatest composer?
      By sephiroth clock in forum Extended Discussion
      Replies: 13
      Last Post: 07-15-2007, 12:26 PM
    5. I had the greatest LD ever (and this is only my 2nd LD) !!!
      By Delmara in forum Attaining Lucidity
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: 08-22-2005, 01:16 PM

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •