Virgil
Posts:
4,482
Registered:
1/6/11
|
|
Re: Peer-reviewed arguments against Cantor Diagonalization
Posted:
Nov 1, 2012 12:07 AM
|
|
In article <k6rvjb$svg$1@dont-email.me>,
"LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> wrote:
> "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@phiwumbda.org> wrote in message
> news:87txtaqxih.fsf@phiwumbda.org...
> > "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> writes:
> >> "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@phiwumbda.org> wrote in message
> >> news:87fw4usk5z.fsf@phiwumbda.org...
> >>> "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> writes:
> >>>> "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@phiwumbda.org> wrote in message
> >>>> news:87k3u6sodj.fsf@phiwumbda.org...
> >> <snipped>
> >>
> >>>>> But when we judge your capacity for reasoning in general, we may well
> >>>>> remember your screed that ZFC is a falsehood perpetrated on the masses
> >>>>> just because, well, the illuminati are so darned used to lying that
> >>>>> they
> >>>>> lie about math, too.
> >>>>
> >>>> I judge too mate, and you now find out where exactly I said that ZFC is
> >>>> the root of evil.
> >>>
> >>> To be perfectly honest, I've no idea how I ought to interpret the above
> >>> response. I've no idea what you mean.
> >>>
> >>> Are you indeed honestly saying that ZFC is the root of evil? Or is this
> >>> sarcastic? For myself, I haven't a clue.
> >>
> >> Argh! My bad (English): I meant to say please find out where exactly I
> >> said
> >> that ZFC is the root of evil, intending that I have never said any such
> >> thing. My tirades have to do with global politics and policies, not with
> >> this or that specifics.
> >
> > I never said you thought that set theory was a root of evil, but, near
> > as I can figger, you said that it was a symptom of a lying culture which
> > lies just 'cause it can.
>
> You could say because it wants, not because it can: anyway, you rephrase it
> as a 13 year old would, but yes, let's say you almost got it, son, though
> not quite. OTOH, I am pretty sure you could do better, if only you could be
> any little more honest.
>
> > In an honest culture, we would all admit that
> > set theory is a plain falsehood.
>
> No, I have never said that: there are indeed things that I find are patently
> wrong, the standard theory of cardinality being one of them, but that does
> not mean I'd discard the baby too. Not to mention that we all have "search"
> strategies, and a world of fools and criminals means just do not expect that
> I be a gentlemen. It's a war, mate.
>
> > If this is an accurate representation of what you meant, then you are
> > indeed an idiot.
>
> It is far from accurate, but no worries: I still have way to go before I can
> compete with you at that level.
>
> > If not, feel free to correct my misunderstanding of your insights.
>
> As long as you have no ethics, you remain incorrigible.
>
> Now, have we finished with this confrontation? Even Virgil is losing his
> temper...
>
> -LV
>
Possibly with you, but not with Jesse.
--
|
|
