Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: Lester Zick (lesterDELzick_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 03/23/05
- Next message: Jim Spriggs: "Re: Proof of ordered powerset"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:07:11 GMT
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:52:57 +0100, Giuseppe Bilotta
<bilotta78@hotpop.com> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>Albert Wagner wrote:
>> > I would like to hear a defition of 'infinite' by you.
>>
>> I am not attempting to perform mathematical operations on the
>> concept 'infinite' as if it were a number; You are. I refuse to
>> accept your burden of proof. Nice sidestep, but it fails.
>
>You are the one sidestepping. I didn't ask you to perform
>operations on it. I asked you to give a definition. So the one
>sidestepping is you.
The definition for infinity is that it is undefined.
>(And I'm not even remarking how people (like you) have refused
>to acknowledge negatives and irrationals as "numbers", not to
>talk about the imaginary *shiver* numbers.)
>
>--
>Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
>
>Can't you see
>It all makes perfect sense
>Expressed in dollar and cents
>Pounds shillings and pence
> (Roger Waters)
Regards - Lester
- Next message: Jim Spriggs: "Re: Proof of ordered powerset"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Giuseppe Bilotta: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
