Oof just looked that up on (wiki), and I’m gunna just say “finish the video and let’s see if you want to take the convo in a different direction because I have nothing of value to say about the sovereign citizen movement and especially not about weird grammatical sub-theories therein”
So math based on Axioms, based on grammar is fine, especially when it's created to created paradoxes. But creating grammar to prove math is 'oof' and 'lol'?
Well at least you have a closed mind.
In addition, the basic premise of the video seems to revolve around your definition of the word 'conjecture' as something that is provable. Which is not how I define that word.
The entire point of Gödel’s work was to remove the unreliability of language. He reduced “Logic” (i.e. or,and,if, etc) to symbols. He then demonstrated that even when reduced to their most fundamental form, symbolic representation (i.e. math and thus language and thus human culture and so many other things), logic is INCOMPLETE. When you understand what that means, the way your perceive the world will change.
Regarding that silly shit you mentioned, here is the quote from wiki, aka the first thing that comes up when searched:
He was a proponent of the use of certain syntax he created to be used by people involved in legal proceedings. He referred to his syntax as QUANTUM-LANGUAGE-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR which he asserts constitutes "correct sentence structure communication syntax."[7] This is a variation of the tax protester "capital letters" argument, a form of strawman theory. People seeking remedy with Miller's syntax in court have not met with success.[2][8]
Sounds worthless, am I missing something? Because according to Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, not only is the idea of a “perfect language” (much less one that magically wins court cases for you) silly, but literally not real
"logic is INCOMPLETE. When you understand what that means, the way yo͓͓͂ͪur perceive the world will change"
Correct, when you assume this to be true. You are a person without meaning. You become un-grouded, and scared like an animal free from his cage while falling off a cliff.
Systems can neither self test themselves, nor self actualize. Which leads me to my next Question...
Fifteen minutes in, and I am thinking of 'Now Time Quantum Grammar'.
Oof just looked that up on (wiki), and I’m gunna just say “finish the video and let’s see if you want to take the convo in a different direction because I have nothing of value to say about the sovereign citizen movement and especially not about weird grammatical sub-theories therein”
Lol
So math based on Axioms, based on grammar is fine, especially when it's created to created paradoxes. But creating grammar to prove math is 'oof' and 'lol'?
Well at least you have a closed mind.
In addition, the basic premise of the video seems to revolve around your definition of the word 'conjecture' as something that is provable. Which is not how I define that word.
The entire point of Gödel’s work was to remove the unreliability of language. He reduced “Logic” (i.e. or,and,if, etc) to symbols. He then demonstrated that even when reduced to their most fundamental form, symbolic representation (i.e. math and thus language and thus human culture and so many other things), logic is INCOMPLETE. When you understand what that means, the way your perceive the world will change.
Regarding that silly shit you mentioned, here is the quote from wiki, aka the first thing that comes up when searched:
Sounds worthless, am I missing something? Because according to Gödel’s incompleteness theorem, not only is the idea of a “perfect language” (much less one that magically wins court cases for you) silly, but literally not real
Wow. I touched a nerve there didn't I? More like a live wire.
Correct, when you assume this to be true. You are a person without meaning. You become un-grouded, and scared like an animal free from his cage while falling off a cliff.
Systems can neither self test themselves, nor self actualize. Which leads me to my next Question...
Hi. How are you do͂ing?