> "joanna" == joanna bujes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
joanna> Trust me; he _is_ the only worthwhile philosopher I've
joanna> encountered in the twentieth century.
You should really, really read Marilyn Frye's The Politics of
Reality.
Kendall Clark
--
Jazz is only what you are. -- Louis
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34622] Re: RE: Re: doublethink
I wrote:
> > no, I only wanted to stop the discussion if the concept of "paraconsistent
> > logic" remained undefined, vague, confusing, etc., with no specific example
> > of any sort.
Ian writes:
> And I p
At 05:11 PM 02/11/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Sorry about linear algebra. You didn't find eigenvectors beautiful?
No, but it may have had to do with my math teacher, he seemed to be
sleeping through the class too.
Joanna
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 9:32 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:34619] RE: Re: doublethink
> no, I only wanted to stop the discussion if the concept of "paraconsistent
>
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34616] Re: doublethink
no, I only wanted to stop the discussion if the concept of "paraconsistent logic" remained undefined, vague, confusing, etc., with no specific example of any sort.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jde
On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Peter Dorman wrote:
>
> Sorry about linear algebra. You didn't find
> eigenvectors beautiful?
>
> Peter
I was always told that there were two ways to learn
linear algebra; the hard way and the easy way. And the
easy way doesn't work.
dd
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> (This discussion is going in extremely abstract circles. Either it should
> stop here
=
Hey, given your opening Ari-logic prescription, you're right. Because I'm not
writing a book for the list on the lis
Sorry about linear algebra. You didn't find eigenvectors beautiful?
Peter
joanna bujes wrote:
I only like math because it's beautiful and elegant, but I have no
desire (and probably no ability) to understand why it is so. I
made it through Calculus and vector calculus...was bored to tear
Carrol Cox wrote:
> ravi wrote:
>
>>on the paradox, my potentially incorrect attempt at summarizing the
>>history and details:
>
> Isn't it the same as the Cretan Liar paradox.
> The Cretan says, all statements made by Cretans are false.
>
> I don't know the exact history -- but Russell's discov
At 06:28 PM 02/11/2003 -0500, you wrote:
but the russell that ian recommends we read is not the philosopher of
logical atomism or atheism or "the silliness of marriage" ;-). the
development of the formalization of mathematics triggered by frege
(peano et al) in the late 19th century and brought to
- Original Message -
From: "joanna bujes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 3:12 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:34577] Re: Re: Re: Re: doublethink
> Forget Russell, read Wittgenstein. "The Philosophical Investigations"
joanna bujes wrote:
> Forget Russell, read Wittgenstein. "The Philosophical Investigations" is a
> real treat.
>
i believe wittgenstein's cambridge lectures on the foundations of
mathematics might also be an interesting read in this matter. of
particular interest is the tussle between the hard-n
Forget Russell, read Wittgenstein. "The Philosophical Investigations" is a
real treat.
What I love about Wittgenstein is that he writes about very difficult
things in very simple languageas opposed to most philosophers, who
write about very simple things in very impenetrable language. At th
ravi wrote:
>
>
> on the paradox, my potentially incorrect attempt at summarizing the
> history and details:
Isn't it the same as the Cretan Liar paradox.
The Cretan says, all statements made by Cretans are false.
I don't know the exact history -- but Russell's discovery must have been
the re
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> >If you don't know what
> > Russell's paradox is I'll take the liberty of asking
> > that you look it up as it's one of the most
> > important results of 20th century mathematics-logic.
> > Feel free to refuse.>
> >
>
> Alternatively, Ian, you could carry out th
Ian Murray wrote:
>
> part. If you don't know what Russell's paradox is I'll take the
> liberty of asking that you look it up as it's one of the most
> important results of 20th century mathematics-logic. Feel free to
> refuse.>
>
not wanting to miss an opportunity to correct ian and hence loo
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Alternatively, Ian, you could carry out the task of
> looking up problems for all and only all those
> listmembers who won't look them up for themselves :-)
>
> dd
>
===
:-)
Ian
>
>If you don't know what
> Russell's paradox is I'll take the liberty of asking
> that you look it up as it's one of the most
> important results of 20th century mathematics-logic.
> Feel free to refuse.>
>
Alternatively, Ian, you could carry out the task of
looking up problems for all and only
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34524] Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: doublethink
Ian had written :>>>He [Nagarjuna] invites us to explore that which is neither irrational nor embraces the law of non-contradiction and the law of the excluded middle. To the extent those issues make contact [with]
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Ian replies: >He invites us to explore that which is neither irrational nor
> embraces the law of non-contradiction and the law of the excluded middle. To
> the extent those issues make contact [with] d-t, via associative p
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34468] Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: doublethink
Ian: >>> Nagarjuna was arguably the first philosopher to systematically explore and *break* with the limits of the applicability of the law of non-contradiction and the implications for ontology and epistemology.<<
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Ian: > Nagarjuna was arguably the first philosopher to systematically
> explore and
> > *break* with the limits of the applicability of the law of
> non-contradiction
> > and the implications for ontology and epistemology.
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34461] Re: RE: Re: doublethink
Ian: > Nagarjuna was arguably the first philosopher to systematically explore and
> *break* with the limits of the applicability of the law of non-contradiction
> and the implications for ontology and epistemology.
so he or she
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 1:25 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:34459] RE: Re: doublethink
> the cited paper starts by saying "Nagarjuna is surely one of the most
> difficult
Title: RE: [PEN-L:34458] Re: doublethink
the cited paper starts by saying "Nagarjuna is surely one of the most difficult philosophers to interpret in any tradition. His texts are terse and cryptic."
Ian, your stuff is often "terse and cryptic." Are you saying that Nagarjuna is engaging in d
25 matches
Mail list logo