I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
least there is something absolute in the world.
"Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
something is absolute.
Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
something is absolute, hehehe.
Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
things." Well certainly, the function
function (a:Anything)
{
return true;
}
is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
the-less :-)
Greg
"The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
Lee Davis
> I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
> least there is something absolute in the world.
> "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
> However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
> contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
> something is absolute.
> Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
> something is absolute, hehehe.
> Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
> things." Well certainly, the function
> function (a:Anything)
> {
> return true;
> }
> is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
> the-less :-)
> Greg
> "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
> brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
> hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
> phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
> Lee Davis
> On Jul 23, 9:44 pm, EGreg <heyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
> > least there is something absolute in the world.
> > "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
> > However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
> > contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
> > something is absolute.
> > Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
> > something is absolute, hehehe.
> > Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
> > things." Well certainly, the function
> > function (a:Anything)
> > {
> > return true;
> > }
> > is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
> > the-less :-)
> > Greg
> > "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
> > brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
> > hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
> > phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
> > Lee Davis
> On Jul 23, 9:52 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 9:44 pm, EGreg <heyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
> > > least there is something absolute in the world.
> > > "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
> > > However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
> > > contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
> > > something is absolute.
> > > Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
> > > something is absolute, hehehe.
> > > Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
> > > things." Well certainly, the function
> > > is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
> > > the-less :-)
> > > Greg
> > > "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
> > > brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
> > > hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
> > > phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
> > > Lee Davis
> > The problem is resolved with a simple caveat:
> > Nothing is absolute, except this.- Hide quoted text -
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:44 PM, EGreg <heyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at > least there is something absolute in the world.
> "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory. > However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self- > contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least > something is absolute.
> Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that > something is absolute, hehehe.
> Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all > things." Well certainly, the function
> function (a:Anything) > { > return true; > }
> is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non- > the-less :-)
> Greg
> "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your > brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the > hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell > phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra > Lee Davis
> Welcome back, Greg. And I mean that in the loosest sense of the word.
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:44 PM, EGreg <heyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
> > least there is something absolute in the world.
> > "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
> > However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
> > contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
> > something is absolute.
> > Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
> > something is absolute, hehehe.
> > Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
> > things." Well certainly, the function
> > is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
> > the-less :-)
> > Greg
> > "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
> > brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
> > hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
> > phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
> > Lee Davis
> On Jul 23, 11:17 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Welcome back, Greg. And I mean that in the loosest sense of the word.
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:44 PM, EGreg <heyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
> > > least there is something absolute in the world.
> > > "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
> > > However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
> > > contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
> > > something is absolute.
> > > Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
> > > something is absolute, hehehe.
> > > Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
> > > things." Well certainly, the function
> > > is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
> > > the-less :-)
> > > Greg
> > > "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
> > > brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
> > > hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
> > > phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
> > > Lee Davis
> Welcome back, Greg. And I mean that in the loosest sense of the word.
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:44 PM, EGreg <heyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
> > least there is something absolute in the world.
> > "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
> > However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
> > contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
> > something is absolute.
> > Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
> > something is absolute, hehehe.
> > Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
> > things." Well certainly, the function
> > is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
> > the-less :-)
> > Greg
> > "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
> > brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
> > hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
> > phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
> > Lee Davis- Hide quoted text -
> He's just as worthless as ever, evidently. Aren't human beings capable
> of learning? I guess that throws the "EGreg is a person" theory out
> the window.
> On Jul 23, 9:17 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Welcome back, Greg. And I mean that in the loosest sense of the word.
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:44 PM, EGreg <heyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I just thought this would be a fun "proof" to all atheists that, at
> > > least there is something absolute in the world.
> > > "Nothing is absolute" cannot be true because it self-contradictory.
> > > However, its negation, "at least something is absolute" is not self-
> > > contradictory. By logic (the law of the excluded middle), at least
> > > something is absolute.
> > > Now this does not prove that any religious texts are true, simply that
> > > something is absolute, hehehe.
> > > Said more formally, "there is at least one statement is true for all
> > > things." Well certainly, the function
> > > is such an example. But there's something absolute in this world non-
> > > the-less :-)
> > > Greg
> > > "The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your
> > > brain," she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the
> > > hands-free speaker phone as recommended. "I don't know that cell
> > > phones are dangerous. But I don't know that they are safe." - Devra
> > > Lee Davis- Hide quoted text -
> On Jul 24, 3:31 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > He's just as worthless as ever, evidently. Aren't human beings capable > > of learning? I guess that throws the "EGreg is a person" theory out > > the window.
