/sci/ - Science & Math

mfw

This thread is cool and all, but don't you guys think there might be a simpler answer to all this?

Ludwig to Bertrand: "I'm not sure if I"m an idiot or not, if I am, I'll be an engineer, if not I"ll go into philosophy"

They idea of nothing doesn't make sense in the first place. Negation is only the negation of concepts in our mind, not of physical things.

If I see a chair in one moment and then in the next it's gone, when I say "the chair disappeared" I am only referring to the concept of a chair in my mind, obviously not atoms or energy actually disappeared. Indeed, physics show that even perfect vaccums are still something just the same. You literally cannot get "nothing". It is something we made up that stands for "not [concept of our mind]".

So applying the idea of negation to physical things (ie "the universe doesn't exist") doesn't make sense. It is a meaningless sentence.

Thus, there really IS no "non-existence", or "not existing", or "nothing". It's just another case of language being misused and then taken for a genuine problem.

t. W

He was born.

>>6483467
>would it still be the same consciousness, or would it be equivalent to having a "clone" of this robot?
This is a senseless question.

>study advice thread

Ok /sci/ I need to revise my study habits. All through middle and high school I got the highgest grade in maths and physics without straining myself. This first term in university fucked me over something terrible, I can't barely comprehend how people actually study for exams. I studied probably 6 hours everyday for two weeks and I barely got a B in linear algebra.

I always read my notes from class and do the exercises recommended by the lecturer in the course litterature and look at past exams in the subject. What I am doing wrong / not doing?

>picture possibly slightly related. Why can't we all have his genius?

>>6155696
Heard this aspie solved philosophy.

>>6012484
Oh boy.

>>5911778
>If the ideas are flawed or incomplete, what use is the math they use to express the ideas in reference to the actual, Platonic Truth?

>implying

>>pic only linguïstic related

bump

>2013
>science still being shit
never change autist

>>5366547
no.

Human thought is not made to operate on these kinds of questions. You will invariably reach strange loops of absurd complexity.

The word abstraction is itself an abstraction, for example.

don't worry OP, this guy shitted on Godel's faces.

>>Ludwig Wittgenstein
>>Tractatus logico-philosophicus

>>5006513
ITT: Retarded platonics

>>5006534
Also one cool faggot.

>>4791013
ya man the whole overhang of Cartesian dualism is just annoying baggage, I like the application of Wittgenstein private language argument to the matter, pretty much just dispensing with the private and working from the public backward almost.Tho I don't think he was a behaviorist... What a guy

Firstly, I think asking "why is self-interest rational" is not an appropriate place to begin inquiry, because the question seems to assume that self-interest is in fact rational.

The appropriate question to begin with is:
"What is self interest, what is rational, and is self interest also rational?"

This requires giving definitions of rationality and self interest.

If it can be shown that self interest is in fact rational, then the question "Why is self-interest rational?" is not terribly useful. (It's rather like asking "Why is 2 greater than 1?"-- asking 'why' something that is true is true is just begging for circular reasoning).

Personally I think this question is bad. It's an arrangement of nebulous and tricky language that is likely only to lead to disagreements about the meanings of particular words.

pic related

>that feel when waiting for professor to publish your grade

>>2651036
>your face when you were gay and went to hell for being gay

Sup guise.

Thoughts?

Any philosophers on /sci/ , can you help me out? What is Wittgensteins point with his general form of a proposition?