tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post4866620101559702666..comments2023-07-08T06:08:24.162-07:00Comments on Scattered Thoughts: The Dark Knight and Logicvenkata raghavanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05077855300341192921noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-25207296581015132022012-09-02T11:35:52.862-07:002012-09-02T11:35:52.862-07:00@ Rahul M
I think I agree with Schopenhauer. The l...@ Rahul M<br />I think I agree with Schopenhauer. The laws are mainly about how we think. Unstoppable force, immovable objects, these are all concepts and need not be real entities.<br />So, I don't see what it is that he would find disagreeable in the above post/comment by me. Please elaborate if possible. <br /><br /><br />@tsp<br />Kya aadmi hain re tu. Great. You pointed the only exception logic has encountered till now.<br />Infact, Quantum Mechanics has thrown the whole classical logic in a disarray because many laws in logic are based on these Laws of Thought. More info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_logicvenkata raghavanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05077855300341192921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-90901453502063245652012-09-02T08:57:20.059-07:002012-09-02T08:57:20.059-07:00This gedanken does not approve of your logic.
So...<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat" rel="nofollow"> This gedanken </a> does not approve of your logic.<br /><br />So shut and write something funny. About time!tsphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311052074753254628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-38276385913828621892012-09-02T08:55:49.843-07:002012-09-02T08:55:49.843-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.tsphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14311052074753254628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-43640555413552859132012-09-01T01:32:01.233-07:002012-09-01T01:32:01.233-07:00Interestingly, Schopenhauer seems to disagree. I c...Interestingly, Schopenhauer seems to disagree. I came across this during my, for lack of a better term, Wiki-surfing.<br /><br />After stating the laws of thought, he says: "There would then have to be added only the fact that once for all in logic the question is about what is thought and hence about concepts and not about real things."<br /><br />— Schopenhauer, Manuscript Remains, Vol. 4, "Pandectae II,"<br /><br /><br />Any thoughts on this?R@hulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09317017423583600168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-38215451871741618932012-08-28T10:32:28.531-07:002012-08-28T10:32:28.531-07:00@Rahul M
Logic can be applied to (in) reality and...@Rahul M<br /><br />Logic can be applied to (in) reality and as I said we do it at many times (like the train example, or sherlock holmes qoute). When someone asks you whether you want tea or coffee and you say Tea, it is assumed that you do not want coffee, this is a kind of disjunctive syllogism.<br />But as you said absolute is a very difficult term to resolve. That is why I spoke of systems. We take a system (or what is called a world) and talk about it. As I said, "In such a system one can deduce anything". So, in that way you can say that it is relative, relative to that system.<br />True in absolute sense is what logicians understand as Necessarily True. One way of defining Necessarily True is by saying that it cannot be false in any possible world (i.e system). Logical truths are such truths. Example Law of Identity or Law of non-contradiction. <br /><br />venkata raghavanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05077855300341192921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-1900945701196434282012-08-28T09:38:55.138-07:002012-08-28T09:38:55.138-07:00Hmm.... Can logic truly be applied to statements p...Hmm.... Can logic truly be applied to statements pertaining to reality?<br /><br />Let me explain. Suppose a statement pertaining to reality is made. The statement cannot be TRUE in the absolute sense or FALSE in the absolute sense. Because then, you'd have to define what is an absolute. However, by your attempt to define an absolute, you've made it relative.<br /><br />Maybe I make no sense at all or maybe my logic is flawed somewhere, but if do make sense, what is the answer to my initial question?R@hulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09317017423583600168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-921429529639540012012-08-27T23:25:58.009-07:002012-08-27T23:25:58.009-07:00PS: BS is referenced to my thoughts.. PS: BS is referenced to my thoughts.. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07375115241164674802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33759517.post-84875463654759965882012-08-27T22:57:09.638-07:002012-08-27T22:57:09.638-07:00what went thru me when reading this..
P1.. P2.. ...what went thru me when reading this.. <br /><br /><b>P1.. P2.. :</b> ok, we are going into the movie first. It is the venn diagrams.. maths.. <br /><b>Disjunction.. Conjunction.. :</b> hmm.. not maths.. Wren and Martin's English grammar. <br /><b> Sherlock Holmes.. :</b> How is he connected to Dark Knight. Did DC Comics buy it.. (no pun intended, pure thoughts) <br /><b>P.. Q.. :</b> Aha! this is electronic logic gate design. Sambarboy, you still got that software seeds man.. <br /><b> Joker.. :</b> ok, trailers are done.. Dark Knight is on.. <br /><br /><br />Apart from BS, I thought it was a legit statement when I read it first (without the reference to the actual scene), but I will buy your argument for I can skip watching the movie. Will keep an ear out for this dialogue when watching it for next time..Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07375115241164674802noreply@blogger.com