Math Is Fun Forum
  Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun.   Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

#1 2020-05-27 06:56:00

AlexPontik
Member
Registered: 2020-05-22
Posts: 8
Website

Is this argument logical or not?

Hi all,

is the below argument logical to you (does it make sense), or am I wrong somewhere (p.s. yeah, I know it's a weird argument...).
All feedback welcome, but please keep it classy

Hypothesis:
A joke is funny if and only if:
1) When I think of it, it is abnormal.
2) When I feel it, it feels good.
3) I cannot experience it continuously for it to still remain funny.

Forward Proof:
Assume a joke is funny --> prove that all 3 above are true:
1) If when I thought of it, it was normal, it wouldn’t surprise me. Yet a successful joke always surprises me.
2) If when I felt it, it felt bad, it wouldn’t be a joke to me.
3) No matter how good a joke is, I can only experience it from time to time for it to be funny.

Backwards Proof:
Assume all three above are true --> prove it is funny
Start from 2.
2) it feels good. It belongs in the set of experiences I want to live.
1) I think it is abnormal. It is a surprise/unknown experience I want to live.
3)I cannot experience it continuously. It is an unknown experience I want to live, but once…or from time to time…but I’m not sure when…isn’t it ?

In the above text, by definition the following words provide answers to the following questions in life:
1.Think: If I calm down from emotion, what conclusion do I reach?
2.Feel: which emotions come to me?
3.Experience: within everything, it is me, it is the rest (rest = everything-me). What is my connection with everything, this time?


1.My Friend, you want the rest from the rest?
2.Ask the rest for the rest, and you will get the rest.
3.Why are you bothering, the rest of us?

Offline

#2 2020-05-31 04:12:14

Agnishom
Real Member
From: Riemann Sphere
Registered: 2011-01-29
Posts: 24,956
Website

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

Hi AlexPontik;

You are trying to give a characterization of a funny joke. Your argument is logically structured, which is great. Logically structured arguments are central to good philosophy.

However, you must realize that this argument cannot completely be phrased as a mathematical/deductive argument because the idea of think/feel/experience are not formally defined.

So, for example, "If when I thought of it, it was normal, it wouldn’t surprise me." is not a proof. It could be a good inductive argument, however


'And fun? If maths is fun, then getting a tooth extraction is fun. A viral infection is fun. Rabies shots are fun.'
'God exists because Mathematics is consistent, and the devil exists because we cannot prove it'
I'm not crazy, my mother had me tested.

Offline

#3 2020-06-01 02:44:04

AlexPontik
Member
Registered: 2020-05-22
Posts: 8
Website

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

Hi Agnishom,

I agree with your comments, as like you wrote, this is an inductive argument (when I initially wrote this I had "sorta proof" instead of "proof", but I thought in the end it weakened the argument, as I needed more words to explain why I would write "sorta proof").
But since it makes some sense to someone let me explain myself a bit further with this argument, to get another's person's perspective. Also just to warn you from the beginning the below is a bit far fetched smile.


I use the following simple model to describe myself. Generally, I can:
1. feel, which ranges from subtle to intense.
How good and how bad I don't know , but the fact that there is this range is obvious to me judging from my life's experience. The specific point in the range which happens at any given moment, depends on the occasion.
For example, sleeping feels less to me than swimming, and swimming feels less than me hitting myself (and also the last one feels a bit stupid for me to do repeatedly to verify...)

2. calm down, which requires time to work, and when successful changes feelings to a less intense state.
How much time, I don't know , but the fact that I can't calm down instantaneously is obvious to me judging from my life's experience. How much time it will take for me to calm down depends on the occasion, and my previous state.
For example physical pain going away (i.e. stop feeling pain) takes more time , than putting myself to sleep.
Calming down is related to thinking, but when I am thinking, I am also trying to reach some conclusion after I imagine, feel, and calm down from emotion.

3. experience, which has to do with what I can sense happening in time to me.
How experience can be defined formally, I honestly don't know(despite my attempts in this text), but the fact that what I experience has to do with what I can sense happening in time to me,  is obvious to me judging from my life's experience.
For example, when sleeping without dreams I don't have any memory of experiencing anything when I wake up.
Sleeping with dreams which I remember, I can sense in time, and remember the dream in some order in time (probably not continuous but still ordered in time).
When I am awake, regardless of the occasion, and how relative time may seem in the moment, I can feel time passing by.


(and here I may easily be wrong...) it seems to me that the same model applies to other people, regardless of their life's experiences.

If I attempt to define the above three words more formally, I would try something like the below (which is a bit stupid to do, so please go easy on me smile ):

4.Axioms:
1.all people have emotions, which are infinite and uncountable , meaning there are no words which can describe exactly every emotion one feels in the moment, just potential models of humans which go around this problem.
2.But all emotions are bound within the same set for all humans, and this set is the one that describes the humans as a species.
3.Let's name this set H. For any set X for which H is subset of X, and H not equal to X, then X does not describe humans.

Definitions:
1.Feel: an infinite uncountable set of all emotions one can feel at any given moment, i.e. Feel={x|x is any emotion a human has at any given moment}.
What's the use of this:
Using this set, for any given period in time, the emotions one human passes through will be a subset of Feel.
An example would be that for the  time period of 8 hours during work, one passes through calm, happy, disappointed, laughing and the list of emotions continues (with both good and bad).
While we mentioned that the set Feel is infinite and uncountable, we also mentioned that humans have a range of emotions they can go through while being alive.
This range may be similar, but it is not the same with other living beings or, the set Feel for humans is a subset of the set Feel for all life.
For example, cats can see easier in the dark than humans, and they can do this using their emotions instinctively.
Following in the text the set Feel refers only to humans, this last note is to point to the fact that there is more emotion around in life than humans can feel.

2.Calm down: a permutation of a subset of Feel, with the first emotion in the permutation being more intense than the last (or the last being more subtle than the first).
What's the use of this:
We mentioned that calming down takes time for humans. The amount of time it takes is described if we consider the emotions one passes through during this time period.
So we use a subset of Feel to describe a time period for a human. But humans don't pass through all emotions randomly, there is a process to the madness.
What this process is I don't know, but emotions are in some order in the time period for humans to choose to repeat, plus I can write the fact that to for a human to calm down the emotions move from more intense to more subtle.
Let as consider any permutation of the subset of Feel and use two examples below.
1.For example I choose to pass through being not at all, a bit, and hungry first, and then choose to eat, in order to feel satisfied, fulfilled, joy when I eat.
Other permutations in this example make no sense, but there are examples where this is more tricky...
2.For example in human interaction there is no easy way to order the humans emotions, for the interaction to be good for all participants.
Due to this human interactions are circumstantial, and humans try to navigate their emotions per occasion.
3.In practice, most humans try to bound their behavior per occasion, and they aim to be able to do this instinctively, in order to avoid getting hurt.
When this works, people repeat the behavior, when it fails they get hurt in some way and need to do something else than calming down.
For calming down, if we consider a permutation of a subset of feel, with the first emotion in the permutation being more intense than the last (or the last being more subtle than the first), the process of calming down is described enough for the time period it refers to.
Emotions in the the permutation of a subset of feel, can have spikes (i.e. one emotion to the next are distant), even when one is calming down. For example if you have a toothache, and you are trying to calm down, you still get spikes of pain.

Think: a cycle of a subset of Feel, which humans want to repeat
In general the time periods humans go through can be described with the following process as:
1. one wakes up sometime 2. one passes through emotions the rest time one is up (actions are implied here) 3. one sleeps sometime later. --> this is usually a day, although some night owls may stretch it , thus the general description.
For smaller or longer periods of time, humans try to have a 1. beginning, 2. middle, 3. end in all their stories, arguments, facts, or actions in general ,or what they do cannot be understood by others.
For example a story is John went to the grocery shop, bought bananas, came back home and ate them.
For example an argument is that John should have remembered to buy shampoo as his wife asked him to.
For example a fact is that the sun rises every day (An argument here would be that the sun rose yesterday and the day before as long as one can remember, and a story that there was once a time when the sun was a gas cloud condensing slowly to our solar system that we have today).
For example an action described is I wanted to make an omelette I put a pan on the fire, added oil, waited for the oil to get hot enough(judging by experience), broke and added the eggs to the pan, added enough salt and pepper(judging by experience), and waited until the eggs are cooked (judging by experience).
A cycle of a subset of feel describes a time period, for which the emotions are ordered in a cycle for humans.
This may or may not be according to what humans want. When it is, people want to repeat this cycle of emotions, when it isn't people try to avoid it. In everyday words, this is "think before you act".
However, all these written down here are jargon, and to move from a subset of Feel to a cycle of feel which you want to repeat, is a bit of a pain in the math, if I want to be honest with you (I mean look at what I'm writing trying to write here...).
So it requires patience to observe the cycle of emotions you go through and judge where you are out of your desired boundaries.
And patience is a word for which I don't know its meaning, I simply follow it intuitively.

3.Experience: when referring to a moment, it is a moment in time (for humans=an emotion a human has at any given moment), or otherwise it is a cycle of a subset of H. (Feel set= single human, H = Feel set for all humans as a species = all humans now, in the past, and in the future)
What's the meaning of this:
At any given time you experience something when you are awake.
Otherwise experience refers to a common experience humans want to have and can share, either by living it together, or by one talking about it to another.
For example me writing this text is an experience, as I am typing these words this moment. But this isn't a common experience unless I am making any sense with this text.
For example a common experience is a family.


1.My Friend, you want the rest from the rest?
2.Ask the rest for the rest, and you will get the rest.
3.Why are you bothering, the rest of us?

Offline

#4 2020-06-01 04:08:13

Mathegocart
Member
Registered: 2012-04-29
Posts: 2,073

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

AlexPontik wrote:

Hi Agnishom,

I agree with your comments, as like you wrote, this is an inductive argument (when I initially wrote this I had "sorta proof" instead of "proof", but I thought in the end it weakened the argument, as I needed more words to explain why I would write "sorta proof").
But since it makes some sense to someone let me explain myself a bit further with this argument, to get another's person's perspective. Also just to warn you from the beginning the below is a bit far fetched smile.


I use the following simple model to describe myself. Generally, I can:
1. feel, which ranges from subtle to intense.
How good and how bad I don't know , but the fact that there is this range is obvious to me judging from my life's experience. The specific point in the range which happens at any given moment, depends on the occasion.
For example, sleeping feels less to me than swimming, and swimming feels less than me hitting myself (and also the last one feels a bit stupid for me to do repeatedly to verify...)

2. calm down, which requires time to work, and when successful changes feelings to a less intense state.
How much time, I don't know , but the fact that I can't calm down instantaneously is obvious to me judging from my life's experience. How much time it will take for me to calm down depends on the occasion, and my previous state.
For example physical pain going away (i.e. stop feeling pain) takes more time , than putting myself to sleep.
Calming down is related to thinking, but when I am thinking, I am also trying to reach some conclusion after I imagine, feel, and calm down from emotion.

3. experience, which has to do with what I can sense happening in time to me.
How experience can be defined formally, I honestly don't know(despite my attempts in this text), but the fact that what I experience has to do with what I can sense happening in time to me,  is obvious to me judging from my life's experience.
For example, when sleeping without dreams I don't have any memory of experiencing anything when I wake up.
Sleeping with dreams which I remember, I can sense in time, and remember the dream in some order in time (probably not continuous but still ordered in time).
When I am awake, regardless of the occasion, and how relative time may seem in the moment, I can feel time passing by.


(and here I may easily be wrong...) it seems to me that the same model applies to other people, regardless of their life's experiences.

If I attempt to define the above three words more formally, I would try something like the below (which is a bit stupid to do, so please go easy on me smile ):

4.Axioms:
1.all people have emotions, which are infinite and uncountable , meaning there are no words which can describe exactly every emotion one feels in the moment, just potential models of humans which go around this problem.
2.But all emotions are bound within the same set for all humans, and this set is the one that describes the humans as a species.
3.Let's name this set H. For any set X for which H is subset of X, and H not equal to X, then X does not describe humans.

Definitions:
1.Feel: an infinite uncountable set of all emotions one can feel at any given moment, i.e. Feel={x|x is any emotion a human has at any given moment}.
What's the use of this:
Using this set, for any given period in time, the emotions one human passes through will be a subset of Feel.
An example would be that for the  time period of 8 hours during work, one passes through calm, happy, disappointed, laughing and the list of emotions continues (with both good and bad).
While we mentioned that the set Feel is infinite and uncountable, we also mentioned that humans have a range of emotions they can go through while being alive.
This range may be similar, but it is not the same with other living beings or, the set Feel for humans is a subset of the set Feel for all life.
For example, cats can see easier in the dark than humans, and they can do this using their emotions instinctively.
Following in the text the set Feel refers only to humans, this last note is to point to the fact that there is more emotion around in life than humans can feel.

2.Calm down: a permutation of a subset of Feel, with the first emotion in the permutation being more intense than the last (or the last being more subtle than the first).
What's the use of this:
We mentioned that calming down takes time for humans. The amount of time it takes is described if we consider the emotions one passes through during this time period.
So we use a subset of Feel to describe a time period for a human. But humans don't pass through all emotions randomly, there is a process to the madness.
What this process is I don't know, but emotions are in some order in the time period for humans to choose to repeat, plus I can write the fact that to for a human to calm down the emotions move from more intense to more subtle.
Let as consider any permutation of the subset of Feel and use two examples below.
1.For example I choose to pass through being not at all, a bit, and hungry first, and then choose to eat, in order to feel satisfied, fulfilled, joy when I eat.
Other permutations in this example make no sense, but there are examples where this is more tricky...
2.For example in human interaction there is no easy way to order the humans emotions, for the interaction to be good for all participants.
Due to this human interactions are circumstantial, and humans try to navigate their emotions per occasion.
3.In practice, most humans try to bound their behavior per occasion, and they aim to be able to do this instinctively, in order to avoid getting hurt.
When this works, people repeat the behavior, when it fails they get hurt in some way and need to do something else than calming down.
For calming down, if we consider a permutation of a subset of feel, with the first emotion in the permutation being more intense than the last (or the last being more subtle than the first), the process of calming down is described enough for the time period it refers to.
Emotions in the the permutation of a subset of feel, can have spikes (i.e. one emotion to the next are distant), even when one is calming down. For example if you have a toothache, and you are trying to calm down, you still get spikes of pain.

Think: a cycle of a subset of Feel, which humans want to repeat
In general the time periods humans go through can be described with the following process as:
1. one wakes up sometime 2. one passes through emotions the rest time one is up (actions are implied here) 3. one sleeps sometime later. --> this is usually a day, although some night owls may stretch it , thus the general description.
For smaller or longer periods of time, humans try to have a 1. beginning, 2. middle, 3. end in all their stories, arguments, facts, or actions in general ,or what they do cannot be understood by others.
For example a story is John went to the grocery shop, bought bananas, came back home and ate them.
For example an argument is that John should have remembered to buy shampoo as his wife asked him to.
For example a fact is that the sun rises every day (An argument here would be that the sun rose yesterday and the day before as long as one can remember, and a story that there was once a time when the sun was a gas cloud condensing slowly to our solar system that we have today).
For example an action described is I wanted to make an omelette I put a pan on the fire, added oil, waited for the oil to get hot enough(judging by experience), broke and added the eggs to the pan, added enough salt and pepper(judging by experience), and waited until the eggs are cooked (judging by experience).
A cycle of a subset of feel describes a time period, for which the emotions are ordered in a cycle for humans.
This may or may not be according to what humans want. When it is, people want to repeat this cycle of emotions, when it isn't people try to avoid it. In everyday words, this is "think before you act".
However, all these written down here are jargon, and to move from a subset of Feel to a cycle of feel which you want to repeat, is a bit of a pain in the math, if I want to be honest with you (I mean look at what I'm writing trying to write here...).
So it requires patience to observe the cycle of emotions you go through and judge where you are out of your desired boundaries.
And patience is a word for which I don't know its meaning, I simply follow it intuitively.

3.Experience: when referring to a moment, it is a moment in time (for humans=an emotion a human has at any given moment), or otherwise it is a cycle of a subset of H. (Feel set= single human, H = Feel set for all humans as a species = all humans now, in the past, and in the future)
What's the meaning of this:
At any given time you experience something when you are awake.
Otherwise experience refers to a common experience humans want to have and can share, either by living it together, or by one talking about it to another.
For example me writing this text is an experience, as I am typing these words this moment. But this isn't a common experience unless I am making any sense with this text.
For example a common experience is a family.


Hi Mr. Pontik(if that is your last name, of course..),

It seems as though you are attmepting to ground human thoughts and emotion inside a mathematical framework? Good luck; seems a little far-fetched(I do not wish to appear rude or insolent.) I am a little fatigued(by life, family.. etc.) and will review your thoughts shortly.

May it also be noted to all that Mr. Pontik has posted this same spiel on multiple forums and has not always provided coherent answers.

Last edited by Mathegocart (2020-06-01 04:21:22)


The integral of hope is reality.
May bobbym have a wonderful time in the pearly gates of heaven.
He will be sorely missed.

Offline

#5 2020-06-01 04:25:25

Mathegocart
Member
Registered: 2012-04-29
Posts: 2,073

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

I also read your book and read this passage.

“Some humans, very frequently male in gender, if you read anything written about history, seem to go
bananas and want to hurt the rest humans, male or female, cause they are not having fun.”

What does this mean(To me, it seems a little odd..)? And how are they "not having fun?" Can I have some historical examples(because there seems to be none in your Google Docs.)

Also, could you make your posts a little more.. cogent? For one, it would help if you removed your 1., 2., and 3. points and simply said "humans HAVE tried to have a beginning, middle, and end in all their stories..)
I am not attempting to insult or debase your person. All I am saying is that writing at a higher level would make yourself more understandable and receivable to all.

Last edited by Mathegocart (2020-06-01 04:25:48)


The integral of hope is reality.
May bobbym have a wonderful time in the pearly gates of heaven.
He will be sorely missed.

Offline

#6 2020-06-01 10:00:31

AlexPontik
Member
Registered: 2020-05-22
Posts: 8
Website

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

Mathegocart wrote:

I also read your book and read this passage.

“Some humans, very frequently male in gender, if you read anything written about history, seem to go
bananas and want to hurt the rest humans, male or female, cause they are not having fun.”

What does this mean(To me, it seems a little odd..)? And how are they "not having fun?" Can I have some historical examples(because there seems to be none in your Google Docs.)

Also, could you make your posts a little more.. cogent? For one, it would help if you removed your 1., 2., and 3. points and simply said "humans HAVE tried to have a beginning, middle, and end in all their stories..)
I am not attempting to insult or debase your person. All I am saying is that writing at a higher level would make yourself more understandable and receivable to all.

Sure, primarily war in history is envisioned, planned and conducted by men (read anything you like in history and find the counterexamples, then weigh them with the times that the previous phrase applies. If this isn't obvious to you, I will need you to guide me to your view, I am more than willing to hear your perspective)
Also primarily crime in society is envisioned, planned, and conducted by men also (the majority of inmates are male).

the phrase is analyzed below in detail:
Some humans (meaning not all), very frequently (from a statistical point of view) male in gender, if you read anything written about history (meaning if you read anything written about history), seem to go
bananas (means they lose their previous contained good self) and want to hurt the rest humans, male or female (meaning war or crime), cause they are not having fun (meaning if things in the universe were going the way they wanted to, then they would be having fun and would be their previous contained good self).

Last edited by AlexPontik (2020-06-01 10:05:22)


1.My Friend, you want the rest from the rest?
2.Ask the rest for the rest, and you will get the rest.
3.Why are you bothering, the rest of us?

Offline

#7 2020-06-01 15:02:24

Mathegocart
Member
Registered: 2012-04-29
Posts: 2,073

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

AlexPontik wrote:
Mathegocart wrote:

I also read your book and read this passage.

“Some humans, very frequently male in gender, if you read anything written about history, seem to go
bananas and want to hurt the rest humans, male or female, cause they are not having fun.”

What does this mean(To me, it seems a little odd..)? And how are they "not having fun?" Can I have some historical examples(because there seems to be none in your Google Docs.)

Also, could you make your posts a little more.. cogent? For one, it would help if you removed your 1., 2., and 3. points and simply said "humans HAVE tried to have a beginning, middle, and end in all their stories..)
I am not attempting to insult or debase your person. All I am saying is that writing at a higher level would make yourself more understandable and receivable to all.

Sure, primarily war in history is envisioned, planned and conducted by men (read anything you like in history and find the counterexamples, then weigh them with the times that the previous phrase applies. If this isn't obvious to you, I will need you to guide me to your view, I am more than willing to hear your perspective)
Also primarily crime in society is envisioned, planned, and conducted by men also (the majority of inmates are male).

the phrase is analyzed below in detail:
Some humans (meaning not all), very frequently (from a statistical point of view) male in gender, if you read anything written about history (meaning if you read anything written about history), seem to go
bananas (means they lose their previous contained good self) and want to hurt the rest humans, male or female (meaning war or crime), cause they are not having fun (meaning if things in the universe were going the way they wanted to, then they would be having fun and would be their previous contained good self).

I understand what you mean.. but I sincerely do think that it's less "fun" and more of a "quest" for dominance and stability(of their own life,) combined with a few other biological and societal characteristics(i.e benefits for "bad" things whilst growing up and the feeling, justified or not, that the economy is going down the sh~tter..)

Also, you must give evidence for whatever beliefs you put forth. It is not up to us to come up with evidence to justify your claims.
I would also like it if your posts were not massive blobs, and only focused on two to three paragraphs at a time(because, frankly speaking, not many people will invest the necessary attention and analysis into reading what is nearly a page of somewhat incoherent text.)

Last edited by Mathegocart (2020-06-01 15:11:17)


The integral of hope is reality.
May bobbym have a wonderful time in the pearly gates of heaven.
He will be sorely missed.

Offline

#8 2020-06-10 08:49:08

AlexPontik
Member
Registered: 2020-05-22
Posts: 8
Website

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

What is the difference between "fun" and "quest" for you?
If one man lives with a "quest" for dominance and stability (of their own life), could the same man live without fun?
And if that man lives with  a "quest" for dominance and stability (of their own life), a life that in the end is not fun, aren't the words dominance and stability in the end lies that man told himself, and nothing else?
Why would anyone tell himself such lies? Because he wasn't funny, and he chose to define life with more pronounced words. The words that exist in language are enough, and within those words the ones most commonly used, are the ones that define what we humans call "common sense".

And this is what my "common sense" tells me:

Humans need to feel good. Why? For the simple reason and no other that otherwise they would feel bad, and in the end they would damage themselves (this is why bad feels bad, so that you try to avoid feeling this way).
And what about the in between? In between is  all the fun, some people manage to keep their lives feeling good, and it doesn't necessarily has to do with any "quests" they have, some don't, and it has everything to do with the "quests" they have (because their "quests" are in their heads, but fun happens on every part of yourself, emotion is not localized in you brain).


"Also, you must give evidence for whatever beliefs you put forth. It is not up to us to come up with evidence to justify your claims."
Most people think that fun is trivial and they have more serious things to do, and this is where we are.
And my argument is, oh do they?
How about they write to us what more fun is there in life, than just fun? Or do I need to provide evidence to you that there is nothing more fun in life, than just fun?

(If you are having thoughts, then how does one has a fun life, the answer is easy, you find it with patience. Why? Because you need patience to have fun. Why? Because you find how to do this out in a funny way.
Sometimes it is more fun than what you can handle at that moment in your life, sometimes it is less fun than what you can handle at that moment in life, but when you are having a good time, it is just the right amount of fun.
And to find those times, it comes back to the beginning, you need patience to have fun. )

Last edited by AlexPontik (2020-06-10 08:52:08)


1.My Friend, you want the rest from the rest?
2.Ask the rest for the rest, and you will get the rest.
3.Why are you bothering, the rest of us?

Offline

#9 2020-06-11 03:41:18

Mathegocart
Member
Registered: 2012-04-29
Posts: 2,073

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

I have also noticed that you have posted these same arguments on a couple of other forums.. so far, practically no productive discussion(this is not an insult; just an observation, so don't get enraged..) do you think there might be a reason with why no one is attempting to engage with you? Or are they all just asinine fools who don't get the true nature of humanity?


Also, you must give evidence for whatever beliefs you put forth. It is not up to us to come up with evidence to justify your claims

This still stands true, and is a general principle. The burden of evidence lies with the accuser/proof-inventor, not with the people trying to read your ideas.

Could you please [quote..] my writings when you reference them? That would greatly increase readability..


EDIT: removed duplicate "also.."

Last edited by Mathegocart (2020-06-11 03:41:43)


The integral of hope is reality.
May bobbym have a wonderful time in the pearly gates of heaven.
He will be sorely missed.

Offline

#10 2020-06-19 11:05:55

AlexPontik
Member
Registered: 2020-05-22
Posts: 8
Website

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

Mathegocart wrote:

I have also noticed that you have posted these same arguments on a couple of other forums.. so far, practically no productive discussion(this is not an insult; just an observation, so don't get enraged..) do you think there might be a reason with why no one is attempting to engage with you? Or are they all just asinine fools who don't get the true nature of humanity?

You seem to have already reached a conclusion yourself by your response, perhaps you are right, but to explain myself my current view is that:

1.you need patience to have fun. Why? You need patience to find this out. Why? Because you find this out in a funny way.
2.Sometimes it is more fun than what you can handle at this moment of your life, sometimes it is less fun, but when you are having a good time, it is just the right amount of fun.
3.And to find those times, it comes back to the beginning, you need patience to have fun, and if you are skipping through this text, you are not being patient.


Humans can feel good or bad, by default they feel good. Why? Because if by default they felt bad, , there would be no driver for children to do anything if life felt bad for them by default, and humans would have stopped existing.
Does "by default they feel good" mean they feel good all the time? No. Why? Because if that was the case humans wouldn't need to do anything and would have stopped existing (they feel good all the time, so there is no reason for them to take care of themselves).
So how does life go for humans? It has ups and downs, for a good life, life is still good for the person who lived it, for a bad life, life is still bad for the person who lived it.
So what do people do? They try to live a good life, according to what feels good for them.
How they do that is by using their experience and good judgement, no one ever reaches an infallible point, as each occasion and time requires a different approach.
So how are experience and good judgement useful, if each occasion and time requires a different approach? Because if you learn to balance your past experiences (regardless whether they are good or bad) with good judgement (wanting to feel good but at the same time wanting to be careful, not shut off fear from your life), you have a good life.
This is easily described in writing, but, as written above, each occasion and time require a different approach, so to do this requires a lifetime.


1.My Friend, you want the rest from the rest?
2.Ask the rest for the rest, and you will get the rest.
3.Why are you bothering, the rest of us?

Offline

#11 2020-06-24 03:08:33

Agnishom
Real Member
From: Riemann Sphere
Registered: 2011-01-29
Posts: 24,956
Website

Re: Is this argument logical or not?

Looks like we are having some rich discussion here. That's great.


'And fun? If maths is fun, then getting a tooth extraction is fun. A viral infection is fun. Rabies shots are fun.'
'God exists because Mathematics is consistent, and the devil exists because we cannot prove it'
I'm not crazy, my mother had me tested.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB