the triumph of maybe logic (?)

[Jean-Paul Fartre]

Times have changed, And we've often rewound the clock, Since the Puritans got a shock, When they landed on Plymouth Rock. If today, Any shock they should try to stem, 'Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock would land on them. In olden days a glimpse of stocking Was looked on as something shocking, But now, God knows, Anything Goes. Good authors too who once knew better words, Now only use four letter words Writing prose, Anything Goes. The world has gone mad today And good's bad today, And black's white today, And day's night today, When most guys today That women prize today Are just silly gigolos And though I'm not a great romancer I know that I'm bound to answer When you propose, Anything goes When grandmama whose age is eighty In night clubs is getting matey with gigolo's, Anything Goes.
When mothers pack and leave poor father Because they decide they'd rather be tennis pros, Anything Goes. If driving fast cars you like, If low bars you like, If old hymns you like, If bare limbs you like, If Mae West you like Or me undressed you like, Why, nobody will oppose! When every night, The set that's smart Is intruding in nudist parties in studios, Anything Goes.

[hooplala]

*tiptoes backwards out of thread*

[LHX]

Times have changed, And we've often rewound the clock,
Since the Puritans got a shock, When they landed on Plymouth Rock.
If today, Any shock they should try to stem,
'Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock would land on them.

In olden days a glimpse of stocking Was looked on as something shocking, But now, God knows, Anything Goes.

Good authors too who once knew better words, Now only use four letter words Writing prose, Anything Goes.

The world has gone mad today And good's bad today,
And black's white today, And day's night today,
When most guys today That women prize today
Are just silly gigolos And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer When you propose,
Anything goes

When grandmama whose age is eighty In night clubs is getting matey with gigolo's, Anything Goes.

When mothers pack and leave poor father Because they decide they'd rather be tennis pros, Anything Goes.

If driving fast cars you like, If low bars you like, If old hymns you like,
If bare limbs you like, If Mae West you like Or me undressed you like,
Why, nobody will oppose! When every night, The set that's smart
Is intruding in nudist parties in studios, Anything Goes.

i said it before:

this simply does not work



if it did work
we would prolly not be communicating on the intranet right now


i would prolly be fucking you or your sister or the other way around


there seems to be a responsibility that we cant shake
its prolly the only reason nobody here has pulled the trigger


because even tho we can be 99.99999% sure that going berserk is OK

there still seem to be that hesitation


"i die anyway"
like i said - it aint that easy



maybe logic does not NEGATE itself

it makes ALL STATEMENTS VALID





at which point
the truth comes out



any statement not expressed using maybe logic seems worthless

[LMNO]

To return to the original topic of conversation, EP/ML seems to gives us the best possible platform to move forward logically, but does that result in knowledge becoming a probability?

Yes.  Knowledge appears to be an evolving thing, and can often be hinged upon a frame of reference of a window of time.  While I ,Äúknow,Äù that my pen will fall ,Äúdown,Äù if I drop it, there is a very small chance it won,Äôt, for various reasons.  While the percentage of that happening is infinitesimal, it still precludes my knowledge from being 100% sure.  But for me, it,Äôs close enough that I don,Äôt worry about it.  I feel that nothing can be known 100%, and that,Äôs a good thing to me.

Only a possibility?... and if that's so, then wouldn't the original assumption seem a possibility?  

Yes.  EP/ML are simply game rules that we have arbitrarily assumed. (Side note: even the phrase ,Äúoriginal assumption,Äù implies a less-than-100% level of assuredness to begin with).  Those that find it useful, use it.  Some have decided that, for now, it,Äôs the best set of game rules to use.  If a better one comes along, the chances are good that ML/EP will be abandoned in favor of the new rules.  ML/EP shouldn,Äôt be thought o as ,Äúthe,Äù answer, just a set of beneficial rules.

Doesn't it erode any ultimate basis for subscribing to EP/ML since probability encompasses all probabilities?  

Are you trying to do a George Bernard Shaw-style paradox?  Because it,Äôs not working.

The benefit of EP/ML is only a possibility.  Why do we have greater confidence in EP/ML?  

Because when using ML/EP, the level of opinion and prejudice is made more apparent.  ML/EP shows the degree of bias in the system.  This leads to greater clarity, though (of course), not 100%.

To what degree is our confidence greater in it than our confidence in other possibilities.  Using ML, what convinces us that ML is true(r)?

There is no ,Äútruth,Äù in ML/EP.  As said before, they are merely game rules.

In short can EP/ML convince us of any truth, itself included?

No, because that is not its intended purpose.

Essentially, you seem to be trying to fold ML in on itself and make it implode, but ML easily encompasses itself in a very clear manner.

[East Coast Hustle]

threads like this are why nerds get the crap kicked out of them in gym class.

just saying.

Nerds get the crap kicked out of them in gym class because some people can't stand the fact that other people are more clever.

Just saying.

pretentious intellectual grandstanding != being clever

just saying.

[hooplala]

I wasn't intending to grandstand.

Just saying.

And thank you LMNO, you wrote all that much better than I could have.

[LMNO]

In addition, you seem to be saying that if we can,Äôt get to 100% truth, then its Hassan I Sabbah time: ,ÄúNothing is true, everything is permitted.,Äù

But that,Äôs not what ML does.  You seem to be using polar thinking on ML, ,Äútrue/false,Äù, where ML behaves more like, ,Äúnot true/kinda true/more true than that/pretty awfully convinced that this is most likely true,Äù.

Just because probably nothing can be 100% true doesn,Äôt mean that everything is false (unless you ask a Buddhist).

[LHX]

threads like this are why nerds get the crap kicked out of them in gym class.

just saying.

Nerds get the crap kicked out of them in gym class because some people can't stand the fact that other people are more clever.

Just saying.

pretentious intellectual grandstanding != being clever

just saying.

trying to figure something out != pretentious intellectual grandstanding

LHX = unsure where ECH was pointing that gun

[LMNO]

I wasn't intending to grandstand.

Just saying.

And thank you LMNO, you wrote all that much better than I could have.

No prob.

[Toots]

Yes.  Knowledge appears to be an evolving thing, and can often be hinged upon a frame of reference of a window of time.  While I ,Äúknow,Äù that my pen will fall ,Äúdown,Äù if I drop it, there is a very small chance it won,Äôt, for various reasons.  While the percentage of that happening is infinitesimal, it still precludes my knowledge from being 100% sure.  But for me, it,Äôs close enough that I don,Äôt worry about it.  I feel that nothing can be known 100%, and that,Äôs a good thing to me.

This is the beauty of maybe logic to me, at least JPF. We cannot take for granted that our knowledge, although substantially large for a idiotic species like ours is in the frame of the size/age/complexity of the universe quite laughably limited. We do not know anything for 100%...or 169% sure therefore everything is a big MAYBE.

Facts are only facts until they are proven to be wrong.

Just saying.

[LHX]

In addition, you seem to be saying that if we can,Äôt get to 100% truth, then its Hassan I Sabbah time: ,ÄúNothing is true, everything is permitted.,Äù

But that,Äôs not what ML does.  You seem to be using polar thinking on ML, ,Äútrue/false,Äù, where ML behaves more like, ,Äúnot true/kinda true/more true than that/pretty awfully convinced that this is most likely true,Äù.

Just because probably nothing can be 100% true doesn,Äôt mean that everything is false (unless you ask a Buddhist).

its a possibility that certain things cant be known


its also a possibility that certain things CAN be known
but
CANNOT be communicated

[LHX]

In addition, you seem to be saying that if we can,Äôt get to 100% truth, then its Hassan I Sabbah time: ,ÄúNothing is true, everything is permitted.,Äù

But that,Äôs not what ML does.  You seem to be using polar thinking on ML, ,Äútrue/false,Äù, where ML behaves more like, ,Äúnot true/kinda true/more true than that/pretty awfully convinced that this is most likely true,Äù.

Just because probably nothing can be 100% true doesn,Äôt mean that everything is false (unless you ask a Buddhist).

its a possibility that certain things cant be known


its also a possibility that certain things CAN be known
but
CANNOT be communicated

-- or both --

[East Coast Hustle]

threads like this are why nerds get the crap kicked out of them in gym class.

just saying.

Nerds get the crap kicked out of them in gym class because some people can't stand the fact that other people are more clever.

Just saying.

pretentious intellectual grandstanding != being clever

just saying.

trying to figure something out != pretentious intellectual grandstanding

LHX = unsure where ECH was pointing that gun

Hell if I know. It's a blunderbuss.

[LMNO]

In addition, you seem to be saying that if we can,Äôt get to 100% truth, then its Hassan I Sabbah time: ,ÄúNothing is true, everything is permitted.,Äù

But that,Äôs not what ML does.  You seem to be using polar thinking on ML, ,Äútrue/false,Äù, where ML behaves more like, ,Äúnot true/kinda true/more true than that/pretty awfully convinced that this is most likely true,Äù.

Just because probably nothing can be 100% true doesn,Äôt mean that everything is false (unless you ask a Buddhist).

its a possibility that certain things cant be known


its also a possibility that certain things CAN be known
but
CANNOT be communicated

By "known", do you mean 100% true?

Because that sounds a lot like "faith" to me.

[LHX]

In addition, you seem to be saying that if we can,Äôt get to 100% truth, then its Hassan I Sabbah time: ,ÄúNothing is true, everything is permitted.,Äù

But that,Äôs not what ML does.  You seem to be using polar thinking on ML, ,Äútrue/false,Äù, where ML behaves more like, ,Äúnot true/kinda true/more true than that/pretty awfully convinced that this is most likely true,Äù.

Just because probably nothing can be 100% true doesn,Äôt mean that everything is false (unless you ask a Buddhist).

its a possibility that certain things cant be known


its also a possibility that certain things CAN be known
but
CANNOT be communicated

By "known", do you mean 100% true?

Because that sounds a lot like "faith" to me.

subtle difference

by known
i mean
unspeakable



as in - cannot be defined in words

pre-faith