I and 50 of my clones didn't pile on with the same cookie-cutter pomo truisms-about-truisms
-
-
Replying to @Gent_Sausage @arthur_affect
"everyone who disagrees with me is the same as each other" Do you find it convenient to dehumanise people you disagree with? "The fact that lots of people tell me I'm wrong only proves I'm right!" is the cry of cranks and conspiracy theorists. You can do better than that.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @phyphor @arthur_affect
I can scroll capture to show you the hundreds of notifications I've gotten of people making literally the same argument which, it seems to me, actually missed several of Kareem's own points - which is hilarious to me
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
can't. Crap. Don't hold me to that typo. I would have by now if I could
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Gent_Sausage @arthur_affect
I mean, there are lots of ways that 2 + 2 = 5, but the fact that the numbers aren't precise is the simplest one for people to accept. There's very little point going into other examples if they can't accept the basic stuff.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @phyphor @arthur_affect
And in vector math 2+2 = the inclusive range [0,4], depending on the relative angles
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Gent_Sausage @arthur_affect
You're still assuming 2 is precise.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @phyphor @arthur_affect
2 IS precise. 2 grams is not. 2 inches is not. But 2 itself, the product of no unit and no context other than itself is precise 65,000,000 is precise. 65,000,000 years is extremely imprecise.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Gent_Sausage @arthur_affect
2 isn't precise. 2.0... is. It is commonly accepted that 2 is precise, but that's a convention and not universal.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @phyphor @arthur_affect
It's universal to any case in which there is no other context to the 2 than its own inherent 2ness, barring any post hoc shoehorned context in which case it ceases to be a contextless 2 anyway
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
By definition, there cannot be such a "case", a "case" means you're talking about real things that are actually happening that someone cares about for some actual reason
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor
The case being the discussion and conceptualization thereof. I mean you might be under the impression that thoughts aren't real because you've never actually had one but...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Gent_Sausage @phyphor
Well, that's not a case, is it Talking about numbers in the abstract is fun but they don't actually exist, they're like Pokemon
3 replies 2 retweets 9 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.