On 19/10/2013 4:30 PM, fom wrote: > On 10/19/2013 1:04 PM, Nam Nguyen wrote: >> On 19/10/2013 11:57 AM, Peter Percival wrote: >>> Nam Nguyen wrote: >>> >>>> What would you find confusing on one of the invalidity forms (for meta >>>> statements) I've just reminded Peter in my recent post to him? >>> >>> I've raised some questions about one. And there's another is there? (Or >>> are others? Crumbs.) >> >> Nice try, Peter. But this is somewhat a dis-genuine response from you. >> >> Why don't you first comment about my definition of "impossible to know" >> in this context? >> >> (It has to do with a collection of truths in meta level). >> > > No. It has to do with *available* *definitions* which have > been asked for an *not* *given*.
Don't try to be a pathetic liar like the other poster.
Less than 24 hours ago, you challenged me to define "impossible to know":
and I immediately came up with a definition and _repeatedly_ asked for your and Peter's confirmation of understanding the definition, which you both has never confirmed.
If you don't confirm, as you both haven't, then don't be a pathetic liar citing "available"-excuse here: you've never confirmed so I couldn't know if you didn't understand the definition, let alone knowing "available" would stand in the way of your understanding my definition.
If you and Peter didn't understand my definition because of the word "available", _why the hell didn't your guys simply answer_ _my request_ with something like "No, I don't understand your definition. Would you elaborate more"?
> > This is because your "collection of truths in meta level" > is dependent upon "all available definitions" and "all > permissible reasoning methods". > > You have been evasive concerning these phrases.
Don't be a freaking liar.
Can you in a straightforward manner let me know whether or not you understand my definition.
If you don't understand, just say so: like how a typical courageous man would do.
After all it's _your own challenging me to make the definition_ !
-- ----------------------------------------------------- There is no remainder in the mathematics of infinity.