[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 553 KB, 1746x970, Jadhon-Philosophy-Photo-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10280943 No.10280943 [Reply] [Original]

I had to write a paper of existentialism for my philosophy class. My teacher gave it back with an F. She’d underlined true and truth wherever it appeared in the essay, probably about twenty times, with a question mark beside each. She wanted to know what I meant by truth. What is this bullshit? How am I supposed to define words? Using other words? Then I'd have to define those words also. Which results in an infinite regress.

>> No.10280969
File: 33 KB, 540x532, 64ddce83d8a91f9d0c273794955fa753.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10280969

>>10280943
https://www.osho.com/iosho/library/read-book/online-library-truth-philosophies-reality-3b5bb236-5d8?p=bf6d3be8ccfd718d4ffd3b903edb31e1

tell me what you think

>> No.10280973

Didn't Godel basically show there is no such thing?

>> No.10280994 [DELETED] 

>>10280969
I don't understand the point of that story

>> No.10281022

>>10280969
I don't understand the point of that story

>> No.10281032

>>10280943
She is looking for something more subjective, doofus.

The story about the dude admitting he’s right is already a theory called ”zimboes” , though it’s much more fleshed our imaginative than I think you will understand.

Just wrote some hippie shit about truth is a flower.

>> No.10281033

>>10280943
Share your paper and the prompt here without your name. It probably contains many flaws. Being an ex-existentialist (before I adopted non-karmic Buddhism), I'll happily point a few out.

>> No.10281041

>>10281033
It was a paper about existentialism, not a paper for existentialism

>> No.10281071
File: 256 KB, 2047x788, chadrationalist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10281071

>>10280943
http://yudkowsky.net/rational/the-simple-truth/
https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Map_and_Territory

>> No.10281074

>>10280973
>Didn't Godel basically show there is no such thing?
not at all

>> No.10281082

>>10281074
"The first incompleteness theorem states that no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure (i.e., an algorithm) is capable of proving all truths about the arithmetic of the natural numbers. For any such consistent formal system, there will always be statements about the natural numbers that are true, but that are unprovable within the system. The second incompleteness theorem, an extension of the first, shows that the system cannot demonstrate its own consistency."

I'd argue Hume is a better example. How do we know that the laws of physics will still hold in 5 minutes? It's simply a matter of where you want to direct your faith.

>> No.10281088

>>10281082
Godel didn't show that "there is no such thing". He simply proved that some truths can't be proved in certain axiomatic systems even though they're indeed truths. But this means that Godel is already assuming that truth exists and that we know what it is. So he didn't show that there is no such thing.

As for Hume, he showed that we have no way of knowing whether empirical induction can or cannot produce reliable general laws; we don't know whether our inductions are true, but this also implies that we know what truth is so we can tell the difference between something being true and something being false.

>> No.10281100

That's right truth can be relative. So truth isn't the end-all-be-all of what is really important to the human species. Evolution already imbued us with our purpose: to live. To question that is to be confused by irrelevant questions of objective truth. The aim is singularly survival by whatever means necessary: not by the ultimately hopeless quest for truth, but by simple trial and error.

>> No.10281194

>>10281100
>Evolution already imbued us with our purpose: to live.
Delusion. Evolution is not a God with intention. Life simply happened through the laws of physics. There is no purpose.

>> No.10281277

>>10280943
>true and truth ... appeared in the essay, probably about twenty times
Lrn2truth philosophag

>> No.10281508

>>10280943
>I had to write a paper of existentialism for my philosophy class. My teacher gave it back with an F. She’d underlined true and truth wherever it appeared in the essay, probably about twenty times, with a question mark beside each. She wanted to know what I meant by truth. What is this bullshit? How am I supposed to define words? Using other words? Then I'd have to define those words also. Which results in an infinite regress.
not science or math

>> No.10282488

>>10281082
The first paragraph is a proof of the Platonic realm.
You can just define Truth as: "The set of all propositions within the infinite Ideal Realm".
Existentialists (as well as materialists) are brainlets though so they will attempt to deny the Platonic realm (to no avail, however)
>>10281088
Hume proved that Empiricism is a brainlet metaphysical epistemology.
>>10281100
Truth is not relative at all.

>> No.10282528
File: 211 KB, 896x832, yikes.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10282528

>>10280943
history of philosophy time

>> No.10282530

>>10281194
How is the desire to survive not a purpose?

>> No.10282531

>>10282488
>Truth is not relative at all.
Within a certain regime, perhaps. But this is arbitrary.

>> No.10282847

>>10280943
tell her existantialism is for people who find basic metaphysics too complicated and tell her to fuck off.

>> No.10282851

>>10281508
>not science or math
Not math or science

>> No.10282855

>>10282851
Science and especially math is part of philosophy.
vice versa.
Eat shit

>> No.10282885

>>10282488
>You can just define Truth as: "The set of all propositions within the infinite Ideal Realm".
>Existentialists (as well as materialists) are brainlets though so they will attempt to deny the Platonic realm (to no avail, however)
define the platonic realm without reference to truth

>> No.10283017

>>10282530
"The purpose of living is living."
Nice little tautology there. I guess if you want to call it a purpose go ahead, it's not a very meaningful purpose.

>> No.10283024

>>10280969
>imagine be so autistic you made that image

>> No.10283185

>>10281071
kek'd hard

>> No.10283206

>>10283017
Seems too simple to be true, doesn't it? Everything that anyone might ever consider to be "meaningful" flows from this simple truth. If you follow the threads, you always end up here.

>> No.10283255

>>10283017
>look at this definition of purpose
>i dont like it because it isnt meaning
almost like it was called purpose and not meaning for a reason

>> No.10283258

Truth is what the 12 people in the jury box say it is. They are the finders of fact.

>> No.10283278

>>10280943
Don't use the word true, false or fucking truth in your sentences. Every sentence should be a fact, and that will suffice.

Example:
A man has a penis. Denis is a man. Therefore, Denis has a penis.

>> No.10283297

>>10283278
A man has a penis. is using the existential quantifier, not the universal quantifier.
A man has a penis. only implies that there exists a man with a penis somewhere, not that all of them do.
also

>Every sentence should be a fact
This sentence is false.
My name is 342423dsafdsa4we.
A short poem.
A long sentence.
For the sake of contradiction, Assume P=NP.

>> No.10283311

>>10283297
autistic

>> No.10283319

>>10283311
thanks

>> No.10283535

>>10283311
he is right, though. you should have said “all men have a penis”. pleb.

>> No.10283573

>>10280943
You probably fucked up.
You probably did some hardcore materialism and determinism that any average and rational person could come up with.
That's not how liberal arts works.
You have to suck the dick of your predecessors before you're allowed to start making your own conclusions.
How many mainstream philosophers did you cite, how many did you agree with, and what percentage of you agreeing/disagreeing with them was your paper? That's something a college professor is expecting and grading based on.

>> No.10283578

I'm glad I didn't go into philosophy, it all sounds like a bunch of bullshit.

>> No.10283590

>>10283535
How was I supposed to know she was going to make me defined "true"? She could've underlined every single word and complained about them not being defined. Even if I wrote "all men have a penis", she could've complained about not defining "all", "men", "have", "a", "penis". There's literally no way to win.

>> No.10283612

>>10281071
Yud is a crank and the rationalists have really fucking deteriorated. SSC's subreddit is full of unironic white nationalism these days.

>> No.10283624

>>10283612
>unironic white nationalism
and how is that bad?

>> No.10283655

>>10280943
Class papers should be written to manipulate the grader into giving you the best possible grade. The purpose of school papers is to advance your personal interests. Your job at school is to get the best grade you can manage.

Save having a philosophy for leisure. It's got nothing to do with going to school now or making money later. BTW what career do you plan on having? You will have to humor other academics to advance yourself.

>> No.10283725

>>10280943
There are no facts, only interpretations.

>> No.10283742

>>10283725
Pick up a pencil, let go of it. Which direction does it go? Pick it up again, let go of it. Which direction does it go? Shit, maybe there's something to that. Maybe there ARE facts!

>> No.10283746

>>10283612
>hate facts
>hate speech
>nazi for pointing simple things
gee i fucking wonder

>> No.10283756

>>10281082
Oh look, it's yet another retard who knows absolutely jack shit about what the incompleteness theorems mean.

>> No.10284370

>>10280973
This, OP you can use the same terms as Gödel, using concepts as “theorem”, “demostration”, and this kind of shit.
If you are skeptical about the existence of truth, u can use Hume and Gödel works (or lectures about them)

>> No.10284373

>>10283756
Fuck off metamathematician

>> No.10284437

>>10283278
>A man has a penis. Denis is a man. Therefore, Denis has a penis.
You know it's 2019 right?

>> No.10284583
File: 49 KB, 448x600, Aristotle_Altemps_Inv8575.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10284583

>>10283297
>>10283535

You fail to realize that humans use common sense, not logic. That's why computers can't still keep up with human intelligence. Your autistic enough to think everything can be represented with first order logic. You think like a dumb computer, not a human.

>> No.10284632

>>10283573
ProTip: here "mainstream" translates to "french obscurantist".

Derrida should never have been born.

>> No.10284649

>>10284583
"common sense" isn't an excuse to lack rigor.

>> No.10284817

there is a difference between a proposition being correct (true) and "the truth" as a sort of metaphysical entity, people are brainletting out in this thread but if you're still here OP it'd be useful to explain the contexts where you referred to truth

>>10284583
what the fuck

>> No.10284819

>>10280943
>studies philosophy
>complains

are you for real, guy? what the hell did you expect when you sign up for something like that?

>> No.10285112

>>10284583
what the fuck are you trying to say

>> No.10285468

Philosophy is about the understanding of concepts, and the processes by which we come into understanding of said concepts. Truth is a fundamental concept, and you were probably using the idea willy-nilly without defining it from an existentialist framework.

>> No.10285482

>>10284817
OP obviously fucked up in this confusion and the rest of the thread seem to be following him in it, especially if the essay is on existentialism

>> No.10285512

>>10282885
I literally did in the other post.
I did not define the Platonic realm with reference to truth, I defined truth with reference to the Platonic realm.
Learn to read.

>> No.10285521

>>10283725
Nope

>> No.10285548

>>10280973
ctrl f tarski

>> No.10285574

> when /sci/ tries to think beyond the box of 1's and 0's
omegalul

>> No.10285628

>>10284817
>>10285482
I thought "truth" meant anything that is true. Is it not? What is a "metaphysical entity"?

>> No.10285645

Just post the essay you wrote and let us help you

>> No.10285657

>>10285645
It's embarrassing so I'm not going to do it. I just made this thread to complain about my philosophy course. I thought it would be a fun elective, but I hated it

>> No.10285658

>>10285628
>>10285468
This post gives a pretty good introduction, but one could argue that the entirety of the Western philosophical tradition is attempted to grasp with what is the "truth". I am speculating, but I am guessing if he did so poorly as an F OP blustered in saying something about the existentialists, relying upon a transcendent appeal to "the truth", which doesn't demonstrate an understanding of existentialist thought to the grader.

Not that poster but a metaphysical entity is something that exists: so what "the truth" consists of exists differently according to different philosophers, which is different from saying something is "true" in the sense of 2+2=4.

To bastardise a very famous example, what does "the truth" of justice look like? Do you you see how this is a very different question from mathematical questions such as 2+2=4, which presuppose the metaphysical presence of that which is involved?

>> No.10285686

>>10285657
What's embarrassing is that you still think you are correct and that it's the teacher's fault. You deep down know you probably have no idea what you are speaking of - post the text so you can learn, it's literally an anon bord, none gives a shit

>> No.10285693

>>10285686
>What's embarrassing is that you still think you are correct
I don't even care anymore, the semester is already over. I'm never taking a philosophy class ever again

>> No.10285695

>>10285693
I think this is very sad.

>> No.10285699

>>10280943
>/phi/ - mience and sath

>> No.10285701

>>10285657
lmao 20 bucks says youre just a dumb materialist fag who denies consciousness exists

>> No.10285702

>>10285695
Why? Also, what about this:
>How am I supposed to define words? Using other words? Then I'd have to define those words also. Which results in an infinite regress.

>> No.10285704

>>10285699
"What is truth" is a question that is fundamentally imbricated in any discussion of science and math

>> No.10285711

>>10285701
I don't even know enough about the different philosophical labels to give myself one. And why would anyone deny that consciousness exists?

>> No.10285715

>>10285702
Because it's so fundamentally incurious and it seems you don't understand how you are wrong. You are not defining truth as a "word" but rather, as the other poster suggested, a metaphysical concept that has weight in a philosophical discussion. It's essentially just defining terms so you are showing that playing on the same ground as the philosophers you are talking about, or, if you disagree with how they define truth, your points of disagreement. Without this, you're emptily evoking it, which doesn't demonstrate any knowledge of the thinkers involved (presumably a key part of the assignment) or philosophical discourse (a grounds, however rudimentary, upon which we can have these sorts of conversations)

>> No.10285718

>>10285711
It's not really my wheelhouse but theories of consciousness are a thing.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness/

>> No.10285719

>>10285693
Then why are you making a thread, crying about how stupid something else is because you are the one who's not getting it? It should rather make you more interested in why you are wrong and learn from it like anyone else with an intellectual curisoity

>> No.10285741

>>10285512
>I literally did in the other post.
you literally did not, there was a summary of godels first incompleteness theorem , which you apparently dont understand at all

there is not a fucking complete space of every true theorem of the naturals that is consistent. If you think the platonic realm exists, then it isnt even consistent
Godels first literally disproves the existence of a consistent system where everything that could be true, is.

Learn Godel, it takes like 5 minutes to get the gist. what the fuck

>> No.10286068

idfk any context, but «truth» is one of the batshit most retarded words you can use in philosophy. People use truth in so many fucking ways, and how the hell are you using it? Most people I've seen dibble in «««philosophy»»» always choose either God, «Truth», existentializm, or MUH FEELS with no actual fucking purpose or argument. It's all regurgitated bullcrap. If you're taking philosophy, don't be lazy.

>> No.10286083

>>10281033
>non-karmic Buddhism

Lol.
That's like atheistic Islam.

>> No.10286098

>>10286083
The entire study of Buddhism without the notion of there being karma? It exists there only to give meaning and act as a moral guide.

>> No.10286103

>>10283742
nice bait anon, had me there for a second

>> No.10286110

>>10286098
Wtf is Buddhism without karma?

Read the Pali Canon then report back. You just read some westernized bullcrap on Buddhism without even touching the source texts.

>> No.10286116 [DELETED] 

>>10286068
Define idfk
Define any
Define context
Define but
Define «truth»
Define is
Define one
Define of
Define the
Define batshit
Define most
Define retarded
Define words
Define you
Define can
Define use
Define in
Define philosophy
Define People
Define truth
Define so
Define many
Define fucking
Define ways,
Define and
Define how
Define hell
Define are
Define using
Define it
Define Most
Define people
Define I've
Define seen
Define dibble
Define «««philosophy»»»
Define always
Define choose
Define either
Define God
Define existentializm
Define or
Define MUH
Define FEELS
Define with
Define no
Define actual
Define purpose
Define argument
Define It's
Define all
Define regurgitated
Define bullcrap
Define If
Define you're
Define taking
Define don't
Define be
Define lazy

>> No.10286120

>>10286068
Define idfk
Define any
Define context
Define but
Define «truth»
Define is
Define one
Define of
Define the
Define batshit
Define most
Define retarded
Define words
Define you
Define can
Define use
Define in
Define philosophy
Define People
Define truth
Define so
Define many
Define fucking
Define ways
Define and
Define how
Define hell
Define are
Define using
Define it
Define Most
Define people
Define I've
Define seen
Define dibble
Define «««philosophy»»»
Define always
Define choose
Define either
Define God
Define existentializm
Define or
Define MUH
Define FEELS
Define with
Define no
Define actual
Define purpose
Define argument
Define It's
Define all
Define regurgitated
Define bullcrap
Define If
Define you're
Define taking
Define don't
Define be
Define lazy

>> No.10286125

>>10283278
hahahahah benis :DDD

>> No.10286132

>>10286110
Essentially the 4 noble truths. Most of the problems I had with existentialism were due to the fact that I saw my identity as a real thing.

>You just read some westernized bullcrap on Buddhism without even touching the source texts.

You're right about this. I formed my ideas separately from Buddhist texts and found similarities from what westernized bullcrap teaches.

>> No.10286133

>>10286110
Biting the bait. Isn't the Buddhist canon texts notorious for the lack of traceability of authorship? It was to the extent that sectarian disputes could both find their arguments supported by "quotations" from Buddha the authority "himself".

>> No.10286142

>>10283725
Maybe the teacher meant that she was the truth. And that all philosophers, to the extent that they have been dogmatists, have not really understood her.

>> No.10286582

>>10286120
Define define.

>> No.10286584

>>10280943
Truth is something that can be repeated and, under the axioms given, be shown to regularly hold.

>> No.10286590

>>10283278
>Don't use the word true, false or fucking truth in your sentences. Every sentence should be a fact, and that will suffice.
Based deflationist.

>> No.10286595

>>10280943
Truth is what is.

>> No.10286599

>>10280943
>My teacher gave it back with an F. She’d underlined true and truth wherever it appeared in the essay, probably about twenty times, with a question mark beside each.
I don't believe you. At least I don't believe that's the only reason your teacher would give you an F. You're most likely bullshitting.

>> No.10287065

>>10283655
>Class papers should be written to manipulate the grader into giving you the best possible grade
This. Managed to become one of the top students in all of my English classes by listening to the teacher/professor and writing exactly what they wanted to hear. In high school my teacher used one of my papers as an example to the class, and said that I must believe what I was writing because of how well my argument was written/posed. I shot that down pretty quick.

>> No.10287067

>>10287065
>and that students name? Albert Einstein

>> No.10287090

>>10287067
It was a high school English class. I'm not acting like I deserve a fucking medal, I'm just pointing out that you can breeze through classes with a teacher that shows an obvious bias.

>> No.10287302

>>10287090
You sure showed that teacher. What a cool story

>> No.10287312

truth is a matter of detection

as in, are you telling the truth, is it accurate?

if you are telling the truth, then simply;

truth is NOT what is
truth is man's account of what is.
It's a useful lie.

>> No.10287329

>>10287312
>It's a useful lie
Define lie without using "truth"

>> No.10287337
File: 108 KB, 500x359, tumblr_mb3hn55P1A1qeh5cfo1_500.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10287337

>>10287329
but that would just a be useful lie, defining he, with a true setence, is just useful use of word, which is a lie. The truth of the matter, if you want that, is wordless but not soundless, and to name it truth is a lie.

>> No.10287585

>>10287302
Your dumbass still read the whole thing and replied. Stop being butthurt about your shitty grades.

>> No.10287645

>>10280943
Why the fuck were you talking so much about truth in a paper on existentialism? She gave you an F because you have no idea what existentialism even is and you're clearly not able to keep up with the rest of the class.

>> No.10287680

>>10287645
I was just using "true" and "truth" like any other word. I didn't realize those words were forbidden

>> No.10287683

>>10287680
But why were you talking about it? She was probably wondering the same thing, which is why she underlined it with a question mark.

>> No.10287692

>>10287683
I wasn't talking about "true" or "truth". I was just using them. Just like how I just used the word "talking" in the first sentence without talking about it

>> No.10287712

>>10287692
Can you give us an example at least then?

And you can use words in ways where they are totally vapid too. If i say ice cream is bad. What does bad actually mean in that sentence.

"God is truth" what does truth mean in this statement?

I think there is a better chance that whoever is grading your paper knows more about philosophy then someone who can't make their way through a philosophy class. So she probably has a good reason for ding it. Maybe ask her about it instead, and maybe you'd actually learn something.

>> No.10287716

>>10287712
I did ask her, but she just said I needed to define those words before using them. I said things like "... is true because..."

>> No.10287727

>>10287716
She has a point then. as in "Ice cream is bad"
vs. "Ice cream is bad because it makes you fat" See how "bad" has no meaning in the first example?

>> No.10288173

>>10287585
Wow you rekt that poster. Super cool anon

>> No.10288274

>>10285741
This is a slight misrepresentation of Godels work. (Its also worth mentioning that Godel himself was a Platonist, and the First Incompleteness theorem was an attempt to refute logicism, and the second, formalism.) Now the first incompleteness theorem absolutely DOES NOT state that their isn't a collection of the truths of arithmetic - in fact it relies on precisely such a set. What it does say is that no axiomatizable theory can deduce all of the truths. In fact, the statements encoding these truth HAVE to be true under the semantic evaluation of the model you're working in. What then happens is that if this is a model of first order Peano Arithmetic, is we can use the ring of integers to basically encode some basic proof theory and the result is that we can construct formula that are neither provable nor are their negations. This only become problematic when we assign a model theoretic interpretation to these sentences that explicitly DOES consist of the truths of peano arithmetic. The problem is not, therefore, that number theory is not underpinned by a definite set of truths - in fact such a set is what precisely what gives Godel's theorem its teeth. Rather, the upshot of his work is epistemological and not ontological: namely, that the truths of arithmetic are undecideable but true.

>> No.10288367

>>10280943
I guarantee that every single living person on this planet believes in truth. There is no possible way to survive even for a day without fundamentally asserting something about reality and fundamentally believing at least some of the equations of motions and purposes are true and unchanging.

>> No.10288455

>>10285741
>there is not a fucking complete space of every true theorem of the naturals that is consistent. If you think the platonic realm exists, then it isnt even consistent
>Godels first literally disproves the existence of a consistent system where everything that could be true, is.
Fucking lying retard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_arithmetic

>> No.10288826

>>10288367
T. Donald Davidson

>> No.10288896

>>10286133
>Biting the bait. Isn't the Buddhist canon texts notorious for the lack of traceability of authorship? It was to the extent that sectarian disputes could both find their arguments supported by "quotations" from Buddha the authority "himself".

Things brainlets say.

Who cares? If you want to know about a religion you better read the "holy books" of that religion and not some 20th century new age interpretation of it.

Even if the "holy book" is not literally the word of the founder / god whatever, it's most likely what makes up the foundation of that religion. What people believed and read for hundreds of years.

>> No.10290095

>>10283024
>making memes is autistic

y'know, I don't really disagree with you

>> No.10290099

>>10283278
Why did you spell Dennis like penis? Were you going for a portmanteau between Dennis and Denise as social commentary on gender fluidity? Do you just really like the word penis?

>> No.10290109

>>10283742
Any given fact is still only a partial truth, it doesn't tell the whole story, and therefore is only an interpretation from a certain perspective.

>> No.10290132

>>10284817
>>10285112
>they don't get it

good joke, everyone laugh

Common sense is basically whatever is a socially acceptable answer, something conjured up by the culture, even if it's "counter culture" wisdom, it's still a form of common sense. Some sort of group or collective decision on how things should be done. Memes, basically, and memetics. Logic would dictate that there is some "objectively best, most optimal, or most efficient and useful answer" to basically every question or need. I think this is a false idol that science pursues. Things are always changing, this is how the universe works, and there will always be a better and more optimal way to do things or describe things, thus changing our definitions and our viewpoints. So, facts become interpretations, suited for the time they are created and subject to change as time goes on.

>> No.10290140

>>10286582
de·fine
/dəˈfīn/Submit
verb
verb: define; 3rd person present: defines; past tense: defined; past participle: defined; gerund or present participle: defining
1.
state or describe exactly the nature, scope, or meaning of.
"the contract will seek to define the client's obligations"
synonyms: explain, expound, interpret, elucidate, explicate, describe, clarify; More
give the meaning of (a word or phrase), especially in a dictionary.
make up or establish the character of.
"for some, the football team defines their identity"
2.
mark out the boundary or limits of.
"the river defines the park's boundary"
synonyms: determine, establish, fix, specify, designate, decide, stipulate, settle, set out, mark out, mark off; More
make clear the outline of; delineate.
"she defined her eyes by applying eyeshadow"
synonyms: outline, delineate, silhouette; More
Origin

late Middle English (also in the sense ‘bring to an end’): from Old French definer, from a variant of Latin definire, from de- (expressing completion) + finire ‘finish’ (from finis ‘end’).
Translate define to
Use over time for: define

>> No.10290169

>>10284370
Worst idea, Godel's work only relate to mathematics.

What you need OP is Aristote and up to date epistemology like Lakatos and Feyerabend (disregard Popper's obsolete views).

>> No.10290181

>>10281082
Copy pasting wikipedia doean't make you smart and useful.

For your information there are more than 20 mathe theories that are both consistent and complete.

And this apply only to math, not to epistemology and philosophy.

>> No.10290235
File: 102 KB, 750x996, 1538051598093.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10290235

>>10283725
This applies to anthropology and social, not to empirical and natural science. While you make a good epistemological point with distinguishing generality (shared between everyone, which is necessary but not sufficient) and universality, the latter should be end point.

>> No.10290235,14 [INTERNAL] 

It is important to seek help for all Online Actuarial Science Writing Services needs from experienced writers for your Actuarial Science Coursework Writing Services and Actuarial Science Paper Writing Services.

>> No.10290235,19 [INTERNAL] 

WonderMouse Technology is a Digital marketing company in delhi. We market brands on the web & make sure that you get bang for your buck by SEO, SEM, PPC, SMO, Email Marketing, etc. Internet business is the present and eventual fate of overall exchange.

>> No.10290235,21 [INTERNAL] 


Here I am sharing a very useful resource for students looking for assignment help. Yes it is Proassignmenthelp providing all sort of assignment writing in various subjects like as : Assignment Help Australia,C Programming Assignment Help, Python Assignment Help, civil Engineering Assignment Help,Mechanical Engineering Assignment Help, Electrical Engineering Assignment Help etc.