i=1
- Thread starter Download
- Start date
In fact its better to claim that you are referring this to the media, I would think if you're such a "smart" "philosopher" then you would have figured that less then a fraction of this community does know about the complex numbers and in that case you should have written this in another fashion. As a philosopher, as you refer yourself as you should not put it in mathematical terms.
Why do you talk shit about mathematicians when you yourself used mathematics in your so-called referring to the mainstream media?
Please, before talking that rubbish check out Platon, Archimedes, Einstein and Pythagoras. They are all famous with big contribuations to philosophy as well as mathmatics, once again disproving that your view about logical thinking as having contrast between mathematics and philosophy is false. Stop talking about things you think you know.
If you were aware of it, why make yourself a fool amongst those who does understand mathematics, stick to your philosophy in that case.
Aint mathematical fundamentalism to be thinking "outside the box"?
Never been, your statements about mathematics still are tho.
As I said, if you refer to yourself as a philosopher, perhaps you should stay in that subject.
Last edited by a moderator:
Souldrainer
Radonia~
In fact its better to claim that you are referring this to the media, I would think if you're such a "smart" "philosopher" then you would have figured that less then a fraction of this community does know about the complex numbers and in that case you should have written this in another fashion. As a philosopher, as you refer yourself as you should not put it in mathematical terms.
Why do you talk shit about mathematicians when you yourself used mathematics in your so-called referring to the mainstream media?
Please, before talking that rubbish check out Platon, Archimedes, Einstein and Pythagoras. They are all famous with big contribuations to philosophy as well as mathmatics, once again disproving that your view about logical thinking as having contrast between mathematics and philosophy is false. Stop talking about things you think you know.
If you were aware of it, why make yourself a fool amongst those who does understand mathematics, stick to your philosophy in that case.
Aint mathematical fundamentalism to be thinking "outside the box"?
Never been, your statements about mathematics still are tho.
As I said, if you refer to yourself as a philosopher, perhaps you should stay in that subject.
In a summary, since I can't be arsed to reply to all your shallowness: this is a piece of philosophy, but you were only able to sense the mathematical part of it.
I, as you should already know - if read some of my other posts - see hope in all communities, until proven otherwise.
You're one of those who I see hope in, even though proven that we have different interests - you are not hopeless.
If every single member of this community rejects me, then I will leave.
I'm only visiting every community out there, if not putting an effort into it; not putting my soul into it - for the remaining chance of interesting subjects & people, for me to interfere with.
Aristoteles and Platon were more of philosophers than mathematicians.
I've never talked down to mathematicians, I rather gave us philosophers some credits, since we might seem less genius, since we do not necessarily put any effort into proving anything, but bring possibilities into perspective.
I'm not familiar, and do not see the logic of your statement "contrast between philosophy and mathematics".
I'm in other words not familiar with using "contrast" as a method of comparing; giving attributes to several subjects, therefor I'm not able to comment it, but a wild guess tells me you're aiming for where philosophers and mathematicians differs & where our difference of abilities lies?
My whole point were to give credits to philosophers rather than a mathematician: both the philosopher and mathematician can have both abilities, though when being a stand-alone philosopher or mathematician, where only one of the professions' abilities applies to the person, one of the most common (lack of) ability, I believe, is then to look for more than logical patterns, as a stand-alone mathematician might do, and find greater meaning than typical abstract-logical patterns.
I, as you should already know - if read some of my other posts - see hope in all communities, until proven otherwise.
You're one of those who I see hope in, even though proven that we have different interests - you are not hopeless.
If every single member of this community rejects me, then I will leave.
I'm only visiting every community out there, if not putting an effort into it; not putting my soul into it - for the remaining chance of interesting subjects & people, for me to interfere with.
Aristoteles and Platon were more of philosophers than mathematicians.
I've never talked down to mathematicians, I rather gave us philosophers some credits, since we might seem less genius, since we do not necessarily put any effort into proving anything, but bring possibilities into perspective.
I'm not familiar, and do not see the logic of your statement "contrast between philosophy and mathematics".
I'm in other words not familiar with using "contrast" as a method of comparing; giving attributes to several subjects, therefor I'm not able to comment it, but a wild guess tells me you're aiming for where philosophers and mathematicians differs & where our difference of abilities lies?
My whole point were to give credits to philosophers rather than a mathematician: both the philosopher and mathematician can have both abilities, though when being a stand-alone philosopher or mathematician, where only one of the professions' abilities applies to the person, one of the most common (lack of) ability, I believe, is then to look for more than logical patterns, as a stand-alone mathematician might do, and find greater meaning than typical abstract-logical patterns.
Last edited:
Souldrainer
Radonia~
True, in my opinion you should focus on giving lessons of philosophy for interested people instead of applying terms of philosophy into mathematics. 
Would be an interesting outcome.
Would be an interesting outcome.
Jesper_Kladden
Donator
What does the ^ sign mean. ?
2^5 = 2x2x2x2x2 simplified.
Jesper_Kladden
Donator
rofl xD That was much, thanks for the answer.
^ = exponent
@Soul
The feedback of philosophies is easier and more common to have shallow feedback compared with mathematics, because people are in general less cocky when it comes to mathematics, while shallow statements? oh, that's fine, that's accepted; we're allowed to make stupid statements, just not giving a false result of a mathematical equation.
Point is: when putting terms of philosophy into mathematics, the amount of shallow feedback decreases, because people become more humble when it comes to number, since they seem to realize quicker that they're confused by numbers, while they believe they still understand the picture when it comes to words.
Or with even less words: mathematical statements are more respected than philosophical.
Question the relativity theory: easy.
Question E=MC^2: uhhh.. maybe later. <-- shallow people doesn't care to look it up.
And another point: would you really reply if I did not make my sarcastic-provoking title and included no mathematics?
Mathematics does not only gives faster credits and reputation, but positive attention & feedback.
In other words: we philosophers are underestimated
@Soul
The feedback of philosophies is easier and more common to have shallow feedback compared with mathematics, because people are in general less cocky when it comes to mathematics, while shallow statements? oh, that's fine, that's accepted; we're allowed to make stupid statements, just not giving a false result of a mathematical equation.
Point is: when putting terms of philosophy into mathematics, the amount of shallow feedback decreases, because people become more humble when it comes to number, since they seem to realize quicker that they're confused by numbers, while they believe they still understand the picture when it comes to words.
Or with even less words: mathematical statements are more respected than philosophical.
Question the relativity theory: easy.
Question E=MC^2: uhhh.. maybe later. <-- shallow people doesn't care to look it up.
And another point: would you really reply if I did not make my sarcastic-provoking title and included no mathematics?
Mathematics does not only gives faster credits and reputation, but positive attention & feedback.
In other words: we philosophers are underestimated
Souldrainer
Radonia~
Well, philosophy does not contribute a fraction as much as mathematics does to the evolution of the society.
Wrong.
Mathmatics is a restricted piece of information; an attempt of objectivity, while philosophy states something mathematics can't fight back on: there's no such thing as objectivity when not connected to anything - this has now been proven by the famous Rleativity Theory by Albert Einstein, and has been stated several times through Quantum Physics & Mechanics.
Mathmatics is restricted to premade rules, rules of thinking, the majority thinking, while philosophy is restricted to each individual; there's no majority deciding the rules.
But yes: Mathematics is contributing as well
Edit: Mathematics are restricted by laws more easily comprehendable by philosophy than mathematics!
Last edited:
