Survey IV. (Philosophical [Antinomies])
Please answer the following:
1) Take the following sentence: 'This sentence is false.' Is it true or false?
2) Take the set of all sets that don't contain themselves. Does this set contain itself?
3) Assume as true the following theory: 'We should formulate theories and critisize them as rigourously as possible in an effort to reject them.' This statement itself is a theory, and so it follows from itself that we should critisize it. If we end up rejecting the theory, what then happens? Can we consistently formulate and reject the theory which tells us to 'formulate and reject theories'? How does this antinomy differ from the previous two?
5 Comments:
1) If the sentence is true then the content of the sentence lets us know that the sentence is in fact false. If the sentence is false then the content of the sentence tells us that the sentence is true. In either case you end up with an infinite oscillation between truth and falsehood for as deep as your mind can handle. No real information is gained either way.
2) No. If this set contained itself, that would mean that one of its members was a set which contained itself in turn, and we've defined the set as the set of all sets that don't contain themselves.
3) But you said to assume the theory as true, and rightly so because it impossible to talk about using this principle on itself unless it is already established as truth in the first place. If the theory is rejected, then it was wrong to criticize and reject the theory. So perhaps the theory should not have been rejected? I would say that this problem is different in that is possible that the theory will not be rejected and hence the infinite recursion avoided. In the first question there is no escape. However I think the second question is the most unique. In my reasoning it is the only one with a concise, provable solution. It does not appear to be an antinomy.
-Mind Taker
1) ...
2) If it doesn't contain itself, then there is a set that doesn't contain itself that is not in this set, and so it is not the set of all sets that don't contain themselves. If it does contain itself, then it contains a set which contains itself, and so it is not the set of all sets that don't contain themselves. This is the set theoretical analog of (1).
3) This one doesn't seem to be an antinomy in the sense of (1) and (2). It seems that we can assume it as false or assume it as true and not reject it consistently, whereas both (1) and (2) involve us in a contradiction whether we assume the statement to be true or false. There is something extra-logical going on with this one. It is only when we assume it as true and reject the theory that we seem to be involved in a contradiction. So, no, once the theory is formulated, we can't reject it.
2) You just raped my brain.
Between the two of you, all the truthiness possible to extract from these questions has been extracted.
But think about this:
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
Is this:
a) A description of our invasion of Iraq?
b) A definition of terrorism?
c) All of the above.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/18/saudi.kidnap/index.html
Can you imagine being this man? He's in a fucking dirty, Iraq hole with a bunch of crazy Jihad fuckers about to kill him. His world is fucking hell right now. I hope he has something keeping him sane. If I was in his world I might be fucked since I have no faith in Jebbbusss or anything like that. I guess I could take solace in the fact that the end of life is not so bad. I guess I'm an agnostic... but a hopeful one, meaning that I think it's silly to have faith in a god we can't know about, but I have a sort of gut feeling that there is something clean about this existence. Then again, maybe that's just my mind fulfilling it's own needs.
Anyway I hung out with big Aaron Zell tonight. We drunk hella alcohol and played audio which was tight. Which reminds me... we need to play some audio soon.
You know what's weird? The old man (big Mr. Zog) told me that I need to get a job soon. He's probably right. I'm kind of bored and I don't do anything. But then again, jobs are gay. I want to live in nirvana and have the following things at all times.
1.) A drumstick of bbq chicken in my hand.
2.) A cigar in my maw.
3.) A beer in the other hand.
4.) A guitar around my neck.
5.) Pussy on my jock... preferably pussy that I actually care about in a love relationship.
6.) A high-def multimedia display in front of me showing only the best stuff ever made.
7.) High levels of alcohol and THC in my mind making all the above things cleaner.
Wow! I bet you guys didn't bargain for such a powerful response. Another drunken, wild, meandering, musing, gay pile from your friend Cody Herzog.
Bye.
Post a Comment
<< Home