Friday, October 14, 2011

Trust V Doubt: revisited.

As I read Gettier's original paper I noted with interest that the real problem is "p implies q", that when p is a proposition/claim/premise or any one of the many synonyms used within any one of the academic disciplines, when that premise is true/false then q will be true/false since q is inside of set p when treated as a quotient of p. One is an important number, one eats one apple at a time. To eat more than one apple at a time implies greed is true. Thus we through the term trust, rely on our others to be not greedy. Proof is, in that they eat one apple, in that drink on glass of water, at a time. Russell's first paragraph in his "The Principles of Mathematics (1903)" is false. When the notion of truth is denied with-in the very system it chooses to explain all that will ever be acheived is a tissue of lies no longer lasting than a soap bubble.

Pure Mathematics is the class of all propositions of the form p implies q,” where p and q are propositions containing one or more variables, the same in the two propositions, and neither p nor q contains any constants except logical constants. And logical constants are all notions definable in terms of the following: Implication, the relation of a term to a class of which it is a member, the notion of such that, the notion of relation, and such further notions as may be involved in the general notion of propositions of the above form. In addition to these, mathematics uses a notion which is not a constituent of the propositions which it considers, namely the notion of truth.

Epistemologically that is true. Deception via theatre set lots and canvas backdrops and the likes of creative possibilities using image editing software are all acts of will. You cannot prove that to be otherwise. The use of the voluntary powers is justified by the outcomes of such like actions. Farmer brown's laziness in not going down into the field but stopping at the gate for a quick visual check obviously was not "GOOD EVIDENCE" since his farmhands second opinion overrode his opinion. Daisy was in the field yes but not where Farmer Brown thought she was.

Take the notion to the nth degree and the same can be said of the BB and ALL LIVING THINGS between it and the BC, if that is, you trust, cosmologist's, or are they like Farmer Brown?. We are on a small sphere under a canopy of stars, no sane person will ever doubt that and each of us is running on a set of built in clock's that own a fashioner of them as surely as the clock inside your computer has a fashioner. No clock no measurement of steps, no measurement of steps, no instant of time for the system's state to be perceived nor any future prospect's for any future change of state within the boundaries of that system nor any possibility of a calculation in future:just chaos. Shannon entropy brought to the foreground against where it once existed, in the background, where information theory was born. Therefore there is a creator of the universe who is trusted, does not decieve nor cheat the system. Case closed.


No comments: