Five questions.

[Melkor]

Be aware, these questions are both notorious and random.
Answer to the best of your ability, and hope it's good enough, because if it isn't, you might not live to worry about it, so everyones happy!

I guess I can pick a winner judging on the answers.



1.If I sent you to look for yourself at twelve o'clock, and you returned as yourself arrived, but not before you left at one o'clock , should I keep you here or there,and will yourself return before you leaves?


2.Does 2+2=4, all the time, and in every possible way?

3.If
1.~all ravens are black
then by the law of implication
2~Anything which is not black, is not a raven.~

Where 2 is true, then 1 must be true.
correct?
and the statement
'Roses are red ( and therefore NOT a raven)' (sorry, I like roses more than apples...)

Therefore, is the sight of a red rose, not proof that anything which is not black is not a raven?
Is there anything other than ravens which is truly truly black!?

4.What can you give to someone, yet still keep yourself?




5.(the most difficult)
If
A states that- things that are equal to the 'same' are equal to each other
and
B states that-the two sides of the triangle are things that are equal to the 'same'.
Then Hypothetically
Z- the two sides of the triangle are equal.

However, I accept both A and B to be true, yet I do not accept Z as true.
Is it possible to logically force me to accept Z, through other hypotheses?






Okay, my mind officially hurts now.

 

[murkrow]

I think this is what seperated IPs from EJs.

 

[Melkor]

The randomness/cunning/depth (or lack of)????


I just know a few people will enjoy this....

 

[murkrow]

I'd just rather discuss real topics.

Really go ahead, if this floats you boat then float on!

I'll be reading all the answers closely and intently.

 

[Melkor]

I see what you mean.
Although for people like myself, this isn't just real, but it's the ONLY REALITY.


In a weird abstract way...

 

[Kuu]

1. There is a fine line between really deep abstract thought, and sheer nonsense.

2. Yes. Math and logic are axiomatic. 2 + 2 = 4 is always true, by the definitions of its elements.

3. "Therefore, is the sight of a red rose, not proof that anything which is not black is not a raven?" No, it isn't proof. I guess there is no proof, only falsifiability (finding a non-black raven).

4. Pain

5. Hmm. Does being equal to the 'same' means equal in all aspects? They can be equal in magnitude (length) but not direction. Otherwise statement B is nonsense, because the definition of triangle does not allow parallel lines (equal directions).

 

[Jesin]

I'd just rather discuss real topics.

Really go ahead, if this floats you boat then float on!

I'll be reading all the answers closely and intently.

I assume you don't mean "real topics" in the S sense of the word.

This is Melkor, not the difference between IP and EJ.

 

[Vrecknidj]

"Yields a falsehood," yields a falsehood.

"Ambiguous," having multiple meanings, is ambiguous. But, if "ambiguous" is ambiguous, then it isn't ambiguous.

"All sentences in quotes are false."

Dave

 

[Frosty]

Q1. I first started wondering "twelve o'clock" relative to what? i.e. whether a person standing precisely at the north (or south pole) would be measuring time by a local clock, or Greenwich Mean Time, or something else. Then I wondered whether, if its a local clock, whether the direction you are facing affects the timezone. When I finally got to thinking about a clock that was moving relative to the observer (general relativity) and so was running at different rates, my eyes started to glaze over and I got bored with the whole concept.

Q2. If you mean 2+2 purely mathematically, then yes. If you mean in some other sense (like putting 2 live dogs in a room with 2 live cats and seeing whether, after a suitable period of time, you end up with 4 live animals) then you'd need to clarify.

Q3. The complete absence of light is truly black. Ravens are visible, therefore they are not truly black. Everything, including ravens, are only partially black.

Q4. Knowledge, facts, opinions ... how many answers did you want?

Q5. Depends what you're measuring. If only measuring length, then they can be equal. But things like colour, density/composition, direction/vector, speed, location, all these (and more) could differ. So, when you mean 'equal', exactly what do you mean by that?

 

[Zero]

1.If I sent you to look for yourself at twelve o'clock, and you returned as yourself arrived, but not before you left at one o'clock , should I keep you here or there,and will yourself return before you leaves?

You wouldn't send me nowhere. I might kick you and leave to never return. I would assume you find yourself amusing, so you'll be find where ever I leave you.

2.Does 2+2=4, all the time, and in every possible way?

Yes, unless the question isn't about math.

3.If
1.~all ravens are black
then by the law of implication
2~Anything which is not black, is not a raven.~

Where 2 is true, then 1 must be true.
correct?
and the statement
'Roses are red ( and therefore NOT a raven)' (sorry, I like roses more than apples...)

Therefore, is the sight of a red rose, not proof that anything which is not black is not a raven?
Is there anything other than ravens which is truly truly black!?

If I have a black olive that I've fed to a black raven and my hair is black and clothes are black, are all these objects ravens? Even though I've already labeled them as identifiable objects other than ravens? Color isn't the best defining trait of anything, since it's an adjective. We suspect a raven would be black, but if someone made it white we would be able to tell it isn't a seagull or a dove.

4.What can you give to someone, yet still keep yourself?

A disease. I thought maybe "your feelings", but there wouldn't actually be a point in giving away feelings. The fact that they're your feelings about someone else is what makes them valid.



5.(the most difficult)
If
A states that- things that are equal to the 'same' are equal to each other
and
B states that-the two sides of the triangle are things that are equal to the 'same'.
Then Hypothetically
Z- the two sides of the triangle are equal.

However, I accept both A and B to be true, yet I do not accept Z as true.
Is it possible to logically force me to accept Z, through other hypotheses?

There are three sides to a triangle. That's sort of the point.


Now I want to ask some (for everyone)

1. If you're prone to falling into ridiculous worlds down rabbit holes, what are you most likely to think makes a useful book?

2. What is something that people say "It's human nature" that you would disagree with?

3. If you draw a circle then two small arches inside it and under those an upside down arch what have you drawn?

 

[Dissident]

Now I want to ask some (for everyone)

1. If you're prone to falling into ridiculous worlds down rabbit holes, what are you most likely to think makes a useful book?

2. What is something that people say "It's human nature" that you would disagree with?

3. If you draw a circle then two small arches inside it and under those an upside down arch what have you drawn?

1- The Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy? I dont know
2- Those which are used as an excuse for weakness and immorality, i would use it to address to the best of us, not the worst.
3- (or something like that?)

 

[Zero]

The first one is from a book, but I've never read that book... It's a bit older than that I'm pretty sure.

 

[Dissident]

You mean Alice in Wonderland? I thought it was a captious question.

 

[Jordan~]

Now I want to ask some (for everyone)

1. If you're prone to falling into ridiculous worlds down rabbit holes, what are you most likely to think makes a useful book?

2. What is something that people say "It's human nature" that you would disagree with?

3. If you draw a circle then two small arches inside it and under those an upside down arch what have you drawn?

1. A fantasy.

2. I dismiss any argument based on appeal to nature.

3. That's open to interpretation.

 

[Thread Killer]

I think this is what seperated IPs from EJs.

I don't think that is an accurate assumption because upon reading those questions, I am thinking to myself, "What the hell was the person smoking writing these." If the OP wrote them, it's fine. They are possibly questions I could see my ENTP friend writing, but seriously, just, no.

"There is a fine line between really deep abstract thought, and sheer nonsense." describes my sentiment exactly.

 

[Quest for Liberty]

1. You should wait until the appropriate time has arrived, then commence with the appropriate action.


2. no, it does not, common knowledge is often overrated.

3. http://www.birds.cornell.edu/crows/images/albino4a.jpg
an albino raven.



4. all known intangible, abstract concepts, and feelings. love, knowledge but first and foremost, FREEDOM


5.I don't think we can agree that a mathematical triangle has 2 sides, MOST triangles have 3...

 

[Melkor]

I don't think that is an accurate assumption because upon reading those questions, I am thinking to myself, "What the hell was the person smoking writing these." If the OP wrote them, it's fine. They are possibly questions I could see my ENTP friend writing, but seriously, just, no.

"There is a fine line between really deep abstract thought, and sheer nonsense." describes my sentiment exactly.

Just for the record, two questions were asked by famous and quite brilliant authors, one is a riddle, and another is a mathematical paradox.
-I'll admit one is completely random.

So perhaps you are the oen who is lacking?
hmmm?

 

[Cabbo Pearimo]

I couldn't tell a raven from a dove. I've got no clue about birds.

 

[Aphasia]

1. If I travel faster than the speed of light, I'll be there before I left (that's what I gathered from reading a description; I may be wrong). So, what you want to do with me then is up to you . Otherwise, you'll be asking me to do something pointless.

2. It is true as long as mathematical values are true, which may or may not be so depending upon the values of truth within a reality (the arguments for this are convoluted and pointless, so just imagine them for me and save some effort on both of our parts).

3. You're using a flawed method of defining something. Deduction and induction are not good methods of arguing a case.

4. Lots of (mostly non-material) things (my favorite is knowledge) and nothing.

5. Ummm:

A: x= c, y=c ; x=y
B: see above
Z: see above

I'm somewhat confused with the phrasing so I may be interpreting it the wrong way.

@Cabbo: Congratulations. Here, have a complimentary pair of black sunglasses.