tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post6305247997712467264..comments2023-05-13T07:41:26.217-05:00Comments on SOH-Dan: The Troll of Sorrow Wildlife SanctuaryDaniel Lindquisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-25369291902340969362008-10-02T12:22:00.000-05:002008-10-02T12:22:00.000-05:00I wrote that Jodi did falsely accuse me. I am not...I wrote that Jodi did falsely accuse me. I am not and have never been the troll, but Jodi falsely claimed I was.Ayn R. Keyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-23154755345770174402008-04-22T18:08:00.000-05:002008-04-22T18:08:00.000-05:00Yeah "J" is the Troll of Sorrow; his style is pret...Yeah "J" is the Troll of Sorrow; his style is pretty distinctive. I'm not sure how you crossed him with Jodi Dean. Jodi Dean doesn't tend to mispell words intentionally, for one thing.Daniel Lindquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-62994465119000602622008-04-22T18:03:00.000-05:002008-04-22T18:03:00.000-05:00So J is the troll of sorrow who I was falsely accu...So J is the troll of sorrow who I was falsely accused of being by Jodi Dean?<BR/><BR/>Fascinating.Ayn R. Keyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-85273351051040856842007-10-27T21:44:00.000-05:002007-10-27T21:44:00.000-05:00I have rejected a comment purely to see what "blog...I have rejected a comment purely to see what "blog-war" is like. The reader is advised to view the comment in the Wildlife Sanctuary; it's currently the last one there. There really was not anything wrong with the comment; I am just <I>drunk on my own moderation powers</I>.<BR/><BR/>Priest is working in the same tradition as Zermelo & pals. He just doesn't like ad-hoc solutions. Which means he doesn't like a lot of what Zermelo & pals have offered as solutions to Russell's paradox and the Liar problem.<BR/><BR/>On the topic of real-world inconsistent sets, consider Chihara's "Secretaries Liberation Club" (which Priest mentions in his review of Sorenson's "Vagueness and Contradiction"; the review is "Words Without Knowledge"):<BR/><BR/>"This is a club to be eligible for<BR/>membership of which a person has to be a secretary of a club which they are not eligible to join. The secretary of this club both is and is not eligible to join. But a female secretary of a male club is eligible to join and a male secretary of a male club is not (both quite consistently). (We suppose that each person is secretary of at most one club.)<BR/><BR/>Not that Sorensen thinks that this is a genuinely inconsistent situation. He says that the rules of the club simply cannot cover the club’s own secretary. And that’s that. But this rings hollow. Suppose that I am the person who wrote the rules; whether aware of the lurking contradiction or not, when I formulated them I said ‘all secretaries’ and I meant all secretaries-just ask me."<BR/><BR/>(Chihara's Secretaries Liberation Club not affiliated with Minorin.)Daniel Lindquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-40712844264578958392007-10-27T20:29:00.000-05:002007-10-27T20:29:00.000-05:00Paraconsistent logic does not have the "law of non...Paraconsistent logic does not have the "law of noncontradiction", ~(A&~A), as a theorem. This does not mean that it has every sentence as a theorem. Paraconsistent logic isn't explosive, so a contradiction doesn't imply everything (as it does in "classical" and intuitionistic logic -- though note that Aristotle's logic wasn't explosive). All a proof along your lines can show is that modus tollens holds so long as we're not dealing with inconsistent topics. Which we generally aren't. Most proponents of paraconsistent logics deny that there are any true contradictions; they just don't like <I>ex contradictione quodlibet</I>, for reasons given in the article I linked to. Inconsistent views do not lead to "the night of all free spirits", whatever other problems they might have.<BR/><BR/>Graham Priest is a dialethist: He thinks there <I>are</I> (some) true contradictions, such as the Liar sentence (which is both true and false, since it's both if it's either). He does not think that <I>every</I> contradiction is true (which would just be to say that every sentence is true, since you can derive any sentence from the disjunction of a contradiction containing the sentence and its negation). His favorite example is "Graham Priest is a fried egg". That sentence is false (only) and not true. The same can be said about your triangle sentence: It's (simply) true, and not false. Which is not to say that <I>every</I> sentence is only true (simply) or false (simply). Paraconsistent logic allows for sentences to also be "neither true nor false" or "both true and false". Truth and falsity can overlap in paraconsistent logics.<BR/><BR/>Priest is driven by concerns in set theory, primarily. He's not a Frenchman. He just wants an elegant solution to the paradoxes of self-reference, or at least some sort of argument for the law of noncontradiction; Aristotle did a piss-poor job of it, and hardly anybody since Aristotle has even bothered trying.Daniel Lindquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-33439235144310539952007-10-27T19:59:00.000-05:002007-10-27T19:59:00.000-05:00"Q can be both true and false"Kids these days. Nic...<I>"Q can be both true and false"</I><BR/><BR/>Kids these days. Nicht. Get rid of contradiction you might as well like move to Paree, pierce your, uh, tongue, and join the PoMos. A right triangle does have a 90 degree angle: that's NOT both T & F.<BR/><BR/> I do agree some predicates could be vague--that's sort of the "gradations" idea (she loves you , and loves you not: she loves some aspects (your bank account), but not others (that one leg has been amputated, etc.)) But that's against the law of excluded middle, not contradiction. <BR/><BR/>So<BR/><BR/>1. P -> Q<BR/>2. ~Q<BR/>3. ~P<BR/>negate conclusion: P<BR/><BR/>~P v Q (material implication from 1)<BR/><BR/>~P contradicts P (neg. con.) X<BR/><BR/>AND <BR/><BR/>~Q from 2 contradicts Q from conditional above.<BR/><BR/>VALIDJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-81006469140199369762007-10-27T19:46:00.000-05:002007-10-27T19:46:00.000-05:00"Blog-war" has me literally in tears. I'm still la..."Blog-war" has me literally in <I>tears</I>. I'm still laughing as I type this.<BR/><BR/>I'm pretty sure Modus Tollens is invalid in <A HREF="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-paraconsistent/" REL="nofollow">paraconsistent logics</A>. ~Q, P>Q, does not imply ~P, since Q & ~Q can both be true (which is to say: Q can be both true and false). Graham Priest has been a blast to read so far; his style's great.Daniel Lindquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-8364982136539384132007-10-27T19:44:00.000-05:002007-10-27T19:44:00.000-05:00Good S-dan. RexMoebiusOk try the link. Gir puts 98...Good S-dan. <BR/><A HREF="http://www.bpib.com/illustrat/moebius2.jpg" REL="nofollow">RexMoebius</A><BR/><BR/>Ok try the link. Gir puts 98% of manga-hacks to shame. Or American pulp-meisters. Viva Gir/Crepax! sort of.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-13886300588694708872007-10-27T19:34:00.000-05:002007-10-27T19:34:00.000-05:00Most mafiosos think that people not in the mafia h...Most mafiosos think that people not in the mafia have mental problems. <BR/><BR/>For that matter, when someone says they actually respect Descartes and the Res Cogitans, the typical philosophical secularist has a fit: why? He realizes he might actually be held accountable for his sins, intellectual and otherwise. <BR/><BR/>Now, baby reductio for the Modus Tollens! Yeah. Come on S-Dan, we know you can. <BR/><BR/>(Publish my stuff S-Dan, or else blog-war).Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-70885794073333512007-10-27T17:49:00.000-05:002007-10-27T17:49:00.000-05:00Rich: Good to know the Wildlife Sanctuary's has a ...Rich: Good to know the Wildlife Sanctuary's has a regular visitor. 8)<BR/><BR/>ToSsy: Sandman was pretty good. Never cared for Moebius's art that much, so I never paid for his books (imports are pricy!). I don't know which you meant to link there, but Blogger comments use (limited) HTML, not BBCode.Daniel Lindquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-32034224153553359582007-10-27T12:04:00.000-05:002007-10-27T12:04:00.000-05:00This is quickly becoming my favorite web-destinati...This is quickly becoming my favorite web-destination. I think that TOS might actually have serious mental problems. Which is absolutely hilarious.BLKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01988676749454830644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-83227431191505826962007-10-27T10:51:00.000-05:002007-10-27T10:51:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-52897976932215690572007-10-26T12:41:00.000-05:002007-10-26T12:41:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-70541569645064223522007-10-26T12:38:00.000-05:002007-10-26T12:38:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-20589790208076086662007-10-22T23:27:00.000-05:002007-10-22T23:27:00.000-05:00The girl with purple hair and glasses is Rider fro...The girl with purple hair and glasses is Rider from Fate/Stay Night.<BR/><BR/>Never got into Wagner, though a friend of mine in undergrad kept singing his praises to me. Not much of a "<I>literatur</I>-aesthete"-type in general. (Like, I haven't read "Moby Dick" yet. That's something that needs fixing before I go blind & die.)Daniel Lindquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-61282577297790705692007-10-22T19:15:00.000-05:002007-10-22T19:15:00.000-05:00The Luv-lee Geisha goil with purply hair, glasses,...The Luv-lee Geisha goil with purply hair, glasses, and leather corset: yeah. Ka-neee-chi-wah. Tho' TOSsy's a bit more fond of......Szechuan..........<BR/><BR/>Ah used to enjoy Samurai Jack a bit, at least for 10 minutes. I'm not much of a manga-head. You ever dig Wagner's Ring cycle?Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-51016210845054247422007-10-22T11:54:00.000-05:002007-10-22T11:54:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-14001756882527770062007-10-22T01:03:00.000-05:002007-10-22T01:03:00.000-05:00rich: That link's pretty great. Though ToSsy at le...rich: That link's pretty great. Though ToSsy at least claims that historical figures have already figured everything out, rather than claiming he's worked it all out by his own genius. And sometimes he does make some good jokes. (I liked the line about "knowing" women "in a rather a posteriori manner".) So he's not <I>that</I> bad.<BR/><BR/>ToSsy: Well I'm not very well going to call you 'j'. That's hardly a proper name. But good luck putting most of the "Law bureaucracy" out of work.Daniel Lindquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05443116324301716578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-20008483967067600912007-10-21T12:34:00.000-05:002007-10-21T12:34:00.000-05:00Ooo "Troll" . Such astounding literary creativity!...Ooo "Troll" . Such astounding literary creativity! There's no "troll"; however there are a few little literary and philosophaster mafiosos (i.e. the Valve--if you can stomach it) who chant "troll" when someone challenges their chi-chi conservative aesthetics and all-around hypocrisy and irrationalism. "Troll" is neo-conSpeak (actually not even neo-con ala Hitchens, but more like PodhoretzSpeak), and equates to something like "one who dissents in a rational manner."<BR/><BR/>Let's start with Quine and his pal Goodman's Constructive Nominalism (google 'er). Or even Carnapian verification. Then you got sheiet to say, about like, anything. <BR/><BR/>Con.Nom. means pinkslip-day for literary frauds, bad german metaphysics, theology, and even most in the Law bureaucracy.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8042142443470259188.post-92131978890037897922007-10-21T11:45:00.000-05:002007-10-21T11:45:00.000-05:00I am reminded of this essayhttp://www.jehsmith.com...I am reminded of this essay<BR/><BR/>http://www.jehsmith.<BR/>com/1/2006/11/<BR/>the_careerist_v.html#moreBLKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01988676749454830644noreply@blogger.com