Mojo
Mostly harmless
Link, please. Last time you claimed to have done something and I went back over a thread to look for it it turned out that you hadn't. And then we have the debacles over Zero and The Selfish Gene...
Skepticism and The Normal
- Thread starter WWHP
- Start date
One of the reasons I harp on this with Zaay, is because what Zaay actually believes is true is closer to a third value system.
In his own words, he has said that 'nature is too complex' to be understood in terms of two valued or three valued logic.
Logicaly, that can only be comprehended as saying that nature is too 'mysterious' to be known in terms of true or false.
Wicca is a creative/magical system of nature WORSHIP. They worship the 'mystery' of nature, and many pagan groups are reincarnations of the 'MYSTERY RELIGIONS'
So zaay believes in mystery. Dont let him play the victim like I am beating up on his beliefs. His beliefs are fine with me, I am not in conflict with them. It's his arguments. For one, his arguments are not true, there is no rational argument against three logical truth values. Ternary logic is a formalized system of logic, it's basis in truth is mathematics. Yet he continues to argue them even after he admits the third value and admits he doesnt believe his own arguments!
So if you wish to believe his arguments, go have at it. I hardly think any of y ou can argue them better than him, and his arguments have far from past the rational mustard.
BF
In his own words, he has said that 'nature is too complex' to be understood in terms of two valued or three valued logic.
Logicaly, that can only be comprehended as saying that nature is too 'mysterious' to be known in terms of true or false.
Wicca is a creative/magical system of nature WORSHIP. They worship the 'mystery' of nature, and many pagan groups are reincarnations of the 'MYSTERY RELIGIONS'
So zaay believes in mystery. Dont let him play the victim like I am beating up on his beliefs. His beliefs are fine with me, I am not in conflict with them. It's his arguments. For one, his arguments are not true, there is no rational argument against three logical truth values. Ternary logic is a formalized system of logic, it's basis in truth is mathematics. Yet he continues to argue them even after he admits the third value and admits he doesnt believe his own arguments!
So if you wish to believe his arguments, go have at it. I hardly think any of y ou can argue them better than him, and his arguments have far from past the rational mustard.
BF
hardly, it was the conclusions of both Zero and the selfish gene that support what I write.
Zaay can handle himself. If you want to go find that post of mine, go do so, I hardly have the patience to sift through threads to satisfy your mystical notions of my meaning.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
You haven't been paying attention. Neither book said what you claimed it did.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Improbability drive?
tell that to the youtube and flickr community.
O brother, now somewhere in your bivalent mysticism you assuming that OS 012 is anti-statement.
OS 012 is founded on a 'law'. That law is "All ideas can either be true, or false, or mystery".
All statements are ideas, but not all ideas are statements.
OS 012 is a metalogic, an overiding logic of how we apply our truth values.
It operates and orders bivalent logic.
BF
No, you havent been paying attention. The conclusion of Zero was that, in the author's own words, the Greeks banned zero. that conclusion, epistemenologically, supports some of what I discuss. I erred in biography of a historical figure, who cares? It's his conclusion that is interesting, especially the conclusion that aristolian bivalent logic was used to PROVE the existence of God.
I dont know what you barking about the selfish gene for. Dawkins covers reciprocal altruism, tit for tat, and non zero sum throughout a significant portion of the book, and relates all of them to biology. That's all Dawkins needs to state for me to say "the methodology of OS 012 is highly similar to 'tit for tat' strategy. Tit for tat strategy is likend to reciprocal altrusim. Dawkins discusses tit for tat and reciprocal biology in the Selfish Gene"
*Bingo*
I believe I have isolated Zaay's truth that he wont argue. Zaay can correct me if I am mistaken.
Is this not what you really believe?
Is this not simply a summation of hindu mysticism, which states "all is maya, illusion"
Do you not also believe that, as you stated, 'mystery' is a value of 'knowledge'? Do you not also state that all knowledge is understood in terms of true and false? Do you not also then state that 'nature is too complex to be understood in terms of true and false'?
You not only use the third value, but you worship it in nature.
Thank you for summarizing my argument. That environment you are speaking of is *bivalent* thinking, which you ARGUE for on one hand, and disbelieve on the other.
You are a practicing mystic, and your truth values reflect mysticism and illusion, and your argument casts an illusion that is contradicted by your own truth value, therefore, there is inner conflict.
You don't argue you real truth value because you know there is no logic that can support it. You fail to notice it is supported by your own metalogic.
I sure hope you thankful for James Randi for having a community that helps you work through your issues, I dont know who has who more *snowed* here, you or james randi...
I believe I have isolated Zaay's truth that he wont argue. Zaay can correct me if I am mistaken.
Zaay, you dont believe in objective reality, do you? You dont think that objective reality can exist. You think that even our most rigorous sciences are 'shared subjective experiences'. It's all subjectivity, right? Objective reality is an illusion.
Is this not what you really believe?
Is this not simply a summation of hindu mysticism, which states "all is maya, illusion"
Do you not also believe that, as you stated, 'mystery' is a value of 'knowledge'? Do you not also state that all knowledge is understood in terms of true and false? Do you not also then state that 'nature is too complex to be understood in terms of true and false'?
You not only use the third value, but you worship it in nature.
Thank you for summarizing my argument. That environment you are speaking of is *bivalent* thinking, which you ARGUE for on one hand, and disbelieve on the other.
You are a practicing mystic, and your truth values reflect mysticism and illusion, and your argument casts an illusion that is contradicted by your own truth value, therefore, there is inner conflict.
You don't argue you real truth value because you know there is no logic that can support it. You fail to notice it is supported by your own metalogic.
I sure hope you thankful for James Randi for having a community that helps you work through your issues, I dont know who has who more *snowed* here, you or james randi...
"Correllian Nativist Tradition.
About:
http://paganwiccan.about.com/gi/dyn...t=14&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http://www.correllian.com/
I find it odd that a man would wish to prove himself so "critical" in his thinking, so rational in his view, to come to a skeptics community and see if they can challenge his 'keen' mind.
I am curious to hear your arguments about the values of astrology, zaay. Would you mind sharing your views on astrology on it's usage in your magickal system? I find astrology a fascinating mystical art, but dont know much about it, perhaps you can enlighten me and us.
http://paganwiccan.about.com/gi/dyn...t=14&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http://www.correllian.com/
One thing about pagans that I love. They love mystery and nature openly and HONESTLY. In this sense, they share something in common with scientists, a love of understanding nature and cracking the unknown.
I just wish Zaay would be honest about his beliefs instead of this charade of character.
BF
About:
http://paganwiccan.about.com/gi/dyn...t=14&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http://www.correllian.com/
I find it odd that a man would wish to prove himself so "critical" in his thinking, so rational in his view, to come to a skeptics community and see if they can challenge his 'keen' mind.
I am curious to hear your arguments about the values of astrology, zaay. Would you mind sharing your views on astrology on it's usage in your magickal system? I find astrology a fascinating mystical art, but dont know much about it, perhaps you can enlighten me and us.
http://paganwiccan.about.com/gi/dyn...t=14&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http://www.correllian.com/
One thing about pagans that I love. They love mystery and nature openly and HONESTLY. In this sense, they share something in common with scientists, a love of understanding nature and cracking the unknown.
I just wish Zaay would be honest about his beliefs instead of this charade of character.
BF
I'm going to highlight these contradictions even further. Zaay has, on this forum, ( http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-25424.html ) supported sending interested individuals with mystical experiences to witchschool.com, an online wicca school where they will teach you
1.) Kabbalah and the tree of life (psst, hey Zaay, cabbalists would say that 0,1, and 2 is Keter, Chochmah, and Binah)
2.)Aromatherapy! Hey zaay, why you bustin' so hard on all of the homeopaths? can you explain to us the values of aromatherapy over homeopathy?
3.)Basic Spell Writing. Hey Zaay, can you tell us about what makes spells work? I mean, without using the word mystery and the role the mind plays when it believes something is true (magick)
4.)Basics of Voodoo. Wow, that's shamanism. Hey zaay, can you break down the shamic realms for us objectivly? looking forward.
5.)Crystal and Gem Magick. Wow, and you got the cajones to trash people who are into homeopathy, eh? What do crystals have that homeopathy aint?
6.) Floral Healing. Flowers too, eh? Isnt that almost close to homeopathy?
7.) Discordianism. Well this is interesting, as I am a fellow discordian! FNORD.
8.)Introduction to Numerology, palmistry, and runes.
I dont think I need to go on.
Zaay is putting all of you on. He is a big bag of lovable woo and he is just to shy to come out of the closet.
BF
1.) Kabbalah and the tree of life (psst, hey Zaay, cabbalists would say that 0,1, and 2 is Keter, Chochmah, and Binah)
2.)Aromatherapy! Hey zaay, why you bustin' so hard on all of the homeopaths? can you explain to us the values of aromatherapy over homeopathy?
3.)Basic Spell Writing. Hey Zaay, can you tell us about what makes spells work? I mean, without using the word mystery and the role the mind plays when it believes something is true (magick)
4.)Basics of Voodoo. Wow, that's shamanism. Hey zaay, can you break down the shamic realms for us objectivly? looking forward.
5.)Crystal and Gem Magick. Wow, and you got the cajones to trash people who are into homeopathy, eh? What do crystals have that homeopathy aint?
6.) Floral Healing. Flowers too, eh? Isnt that almost close to homeopathy?
7.) Discordianism. Well this is interesting, as I am a fellow discordian! FNORD.
8.)Introduction to Numerology, palmistry, and runes.
I dont think I need to go on.
Zaay is putting all of you on. He is a big bag of lovable woo and he is just to shy to come out of the closet.
BF
Last edited:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2397884#post2397884
And what do these have to do with Z's arguments?
Is this an example of the third value in operation?
Even Dale Carnegie's books would be a better start.
There is no secret to negotiation, simply find common ground and areas of mutual benefit. The system you are proposing is meaningless, and its "revalations" are trivial. They also seem to stop you assessing the probability of con tricks.
How is it ok for you to claim openmindedness when proclaiming your scientific ignorance, whilst Z's preclude him from having valid opinions?
Stop arguing from (spurious) authority.
BTW: it is Affects, not Effects in:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2395778#post2395778
Sloppy language is sometimes symptomatic of sloppy thinking.
Jim
And what do these have to do with Z's arguments?
Is this an example of the third value in operation?
Even Dale Carnegie's books would be a better start.
There is no secret to negotiation, simply find common ground and areas of mutual benefit. The system you are proposing is meaningless, and its "revalations" are trivial. They also seem to stop you assessing the probability of con tricks.
How is it ok for you to claim openmindedness when proclaiming your scientific ignorance, whilst Z's preclude him from having valid opinions?
Stop arguing from (spurious) authority.
BTW: it is Affects, not Effects in:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2395778#post2395778
Sloppy language is sometimes symptomatic of sloppy thinking.
Jim
I am interested in the REAL argument, not the fake one. Z's real argument is supportive of mystery, the third value, yet he fails to argue that with me. He fakes a rational argument to support an impression of himself that he finds a need to have validated, which is his own conflict with his faith and his rational mind.
Let's just say Zaay was hiding his third value argument, he was 'hiding' it, for the sake of some manipulation.
Why do i say manipulation? Because by the man's own admittance, he manipulates people, like a 'violin' he calls it.
So he is not arguing this TRUTH value, rather he is arguing to support a FALSE value about him.
This is coming clearer into the discussion, because, yes, I am using three values, a metalogic, to engage in the exchange, and can isolate the bivalency easily.
this is dialectic, an exchange of TRUTH values, and it was a matter of time before the real truth value of zaay became isolated. Now that it is isolted, perhaps Zaay can begin to have a meaningful discussion regarding his conflict of idea with OS 012, and his mis identification of it as a subjective system.
OS 012 is a 'map' of what common ground and mutual benifit is at the metalogical level. It is the process of formalizing that
Oh please, I am exposing zaay's con right before your eyes.
I'm not arguing zaay's belief system or have anything in conflict with it, I am arguing zaay's truth values regarding 'mystery' and showing his arguments not to be consistant, both philosophically (his inner conflict) and logically (his 'fake' argument)
I am arguing from a place of rationality.
sheesh, look who's talkin'
Z
Variable Constant
No she's not. We covered Ennis some time ago. She claims that she was ONCE skeptical about homeopathy, but as it turns out, she's fairly gullible and easily mislead.
Old ground. She's been dismissed already. Can't believe you wouldn't know this!
Bingo.
Demonstrating your ignorance yet again, I see.
As it so happens, Rome, I was one of the top chemistry students of my school, and was in the top 10 of the South Florida Chem-A-Thon. My team was the number one team in 1989 or 1990 - I forget which. Though my 'academic scientific background' is minimal, it does actually exist. Point of fact - I do, in fact, conduct experiments on occasion. Mostly for my own gratification, and mostly consisting of at-home experiments to show the kids one scientific principle or another.
As for 'conducting full moon rituals and pagan mass', why do you keep getting this idea stuck in your head? I'm a Wiccan priest, not a cult leader. Yes, on occasion I take part in full moon rituals. I have always loved nights of the full moon. They fire the imagination. Pagan mass? No. Followers? Don't have any. I didn't say I was a temple head or a church leader - just a priest.
The nice thing about being a Wiccan Priest is, you don't really have to 'hold mass' or 'have followers'. Lots of solo practicioners have earned their priesthood as well.
Actually I've expressed my personal situation here numerous times. I enjoy my irrational, personal, fun beliefs on my own time in my own situation; but I recognize that, when dealing with issues of science, reason, and logic, those beliefs must be set aside as, at best, frivolous, and, at worse, meaningless.
I know more about it than you seem to. Cold Fusion was an old subject here what... a year or two ago?
You're way behind the power curve, Rome. Ennis, Homeopathy, Cold Fusion - done and done. Old news.
Actually, it really doesn't. And referring to me as such is not an ad-hom, no... but HOW you are choosing to refer to me about it is. It has no bearing whatsoever on this discussion.
Just an aside - and this is NOT a comment about you, Rome - but I hear this all the time about blacks and gays. Usually it's from someone you KNOW is bigoted - who demonstrates, in very slight ways, their prejudice - but if ever you confront them, they reply in just this form. "I have no problem with gays. I have a gay friend, you know!"
Just thought it was an interesting observation. Moving right along...
No, that would be you.
I enjoy arguing from the point of view of rationality/reason/materialism/science, because the logical frameworks so employed are rigid enough to craft quite solid arguments and dispel the silliness of others.
What I believe, is that my beliefs are irrelevant.
And a doctor has a professional responsibility to treat their patients with respect and care. So?
Actually, I have. This forum has a few threads - or had, I'm not sure if they're all archived - in which I honestly share my beliefs. I even spent some time head-to-head with CFLarsen over the Wiccan Rede.
I'm fairly certain most of the old-timers here are quite familiar with my world view.
As to how my beliefs affect my opinions, that's irrelevant in this discussion.
No, but it is a popularist journal. That is, they report on subjects that are popular. Like other magazines of its type, they occasionally touch on subjects that are less-than-professional, like homeopathy.
When was this? I missed that part.
That doesn't mean I don't believe in ANY values; only that I believe that, in order to deal with reality, you need more than two, three, or four values of logic.
You find a lot of things odd. Then again, you also read too much into what's been written, near as I can tell.
Z
Variable Constant
You've never really paid much attention to what I've claimed as my beliefs, have you?
As I was saying, it's irrelevant.
This is interesting - after going on about separating ideas from people, you have in this case COMPLETELY integrate me with my beliefs. I'm merely discussing ideas - there is no 'me' in my discussion, friend.
Folks, did you catch the interesting 180 he pulled?
OK - this entire thread. The fact that 'mystery' is not on the objective scale of 'true-false' values. The fact that the entirety of OS012 is irrelevant, since those who would need to use it the most (if it really worked), won't.
And so on and so forth...
So far, though you've answered every argument, you've failed to convincingly argue your point.
And therefore has no bearing on the discussion.
What I believe is irrelelvant. The things I believe have no bearing on this discussion. And as to whether I've been defending my arguments logically or consistantly, I leave it to the reader to decide.
So far, the general response to my statements appears to be pretty good!
Like? Example, please?
Does anyone else speak Romish? This sentence didn't parse for me.
Z
Variable Constant
Wrong again. It's closer to a many, many valued system.
Wow... amazing how you can fail to comprehend even the simplest statements.
What I'm saying is that nature is to complex. Not mysterious, complex. Get it straight.
Actually, though nature RESPECT is a large part of Wicca, Wicca is a polytheistic faith, and a broad title applied to MANY different similar faiths.
What you seem to be thinking of is DRUID.
Complete strawman.
Let me know when you come up with something interesting to say.
Z
Variable Constant
*sigh*
Do you ever tire of trying to put words in other people's mouths?
In actuality, I do believe, very strongly, in objective reality. However, I don't believe that we can ever KNOW that objective reality absolutely. Everything we know comes filtered through our senses, through our brains, through the environment. EVERYTHING WE KNOW is subjective - that is, tainted by who and what we are.
I do think even the most rigorous sciences are shared subjective experiences, because they are. That's why they so often have to self-correct - because objective reality comes along and proves them wrong yet again.
But objective reality is no illusion.
I believe we can come to infer a great deal about objective reality. For example, I believe it is reasonable to infer that, if I see a tree, then there is a tree. But I also recognize that, sometimes, those inferences can be wrong.
Nope.
Wouldn't know... since that's not my belief.
Actually, I believe what I said was, that UNKNOWN is a knowledge value.
Remember, the two-axis system? Known vs. unknown, and true vs. false?
Did I? I believe that what I said was that all statements are either true, false, or misstatements... Maybe I did state it as you claim. A quote would help.
No, I didn't. I state that nature is too complex to only be understood in terms of true and false.
But statements ABOUT nature are either true or false.
No, that would be a druid.
Actually, I was referring to dualist language, theistic language... Oh, heck, I already said what I was referring to.
Can't you read?
Not really.
Not much practice, anyway.
You're silly.
I don't argue my beliefs because they are illogical, irrational, and irrelevant.
And what is metalogic?
Here's a plow - if we're snowed, you're blizzarded.
Z
Variable Constant
Why? That's pretty much exactly why I came here. I love an intellectual challenge.
It's a very old, tired superstition. I don't personally believe in it.
Luckily, in Wicca, you can choose what to believe and what to not believe.
I have been. Ask anyone who has been here a while.
Z
Variable Constant
Once again, your lack of reading comprehension shines through.
All I did was suggest that, if the person in question was interested in the WICCAN religion, they could learn a lot at Witchschool about Wicca.
...if you want to learn it (most of the following classes are purely optional. I've never taken most of them.
Not my belief.
Not my belief.
Actually, that's all there is to a spell. Positive thinking 101.
Some people call it 'prayer'.
Actually, Voudon is not shamanism, at least, not in the same sense as Native American shamanism.
Again, not my belief (voodoo, not shamanism).
You know, I seem to recall, early in my travels here, mentioning that I had no problem with homeopathy - AS A FAITH HEALING SYSTEM. The moment they tried to make it 'medicine' is the moment I was against it.
If someone starts espousing the medical principles of healing using red jasper or rutilated quartz, I'll be arguing against them as well.
Anything but.
At least that would explain OS012.
Again, not my belief.
No, you've done quite well proving yourself an ignorant fool already, Rome.
Been out of the closet a VERY long time.
In fact, this forum has seem a LOT of my woo before.
Nevertheless, this extended and failed attempt at a personal strike does nothing to lessen the fact that your OS012 is a silly, irrelevant system of falsehood.
Now, you've wasted what, at least a page trying to change the subject and focus on me? Is it that hard to deal with the fact that your OS012 ain't the cat's meow after all?
Z
Variable Constant
I've never said less than that I hold faith and reason together, and even allow them to contradict each other.
Too bad you can't seem to handle that.
No third values here.
Yes I did.
You're more like a fiddle, though.
Actually, I'm not arguing about myself at all. This is about your subjective OS012 system.
FACT: OS012 is purely subjective.
And you still haven't isolated a tenth of what I believe.
When you gonna get around to demonstrating that? So far, you've done nothing.
No, you're just flustered because we're right, and in some dark, cobweb-filled part of your mind, even you know it.
You missed.
Z
Variable Constant
A thought just occured to me...
This is pretty damned funny, coming from an artist who has been doing the exact same thing.
This is pretty damned funny, coming from an artist who has been doing the exact same thing.