21#Nomad
哦!我之前試過 click 但個 site 好慢,入唔到,冇理到。啱啱去過但都係好慢,又見唔到你大名所以 gup 咗兩下就走。不過都係無無聊聊嗰隻,你一答就沒完沒了,而且有幾個根本連李天命本書都唔明(或根本冇睇)就亂X,重扮到被「迫」要講英文先 express 到自已咁「慘」, 有D幼稚。書係讀過嘅,係識嘢嘅,但學唔到最重要嗰樣-學養。李天命本書我覺得最 stand out 嘅係呢一句﹕自知無知,乃係智慧的開始﹔自以為無所不知,正是愚蠢的極致。如果呢班人睇完成本書而學唔到呢句,等如冇睇。
佢固然係錯,而且係 narrow-minded。如果我用 dictionary.com 呢個定義﹕axiom - a self-evident truth that requires no proof. 咁就易明D,佢個定義亦冇錯,但卻 apply 錯咗。我地憑我地嘅觀察獲得一D data,你可以當佢係 self-evident fact,但你要有準備去 modify 呢個結論 if it proves otherwise。佢冇,佢係 closed-minded。
1. 將第一因引申為 axiom,係一個 self-evident fact 已經唔再係啱,因為有其他學說可以同樣解釋到宇宙存在,如 cyclical universe, multiverse 或其他。所以對於「萬物存在第一因」,你只可以當係其中一個解釋,佢卻當係 axiom。從語意上「萬物存在第一因」有語病,所以成曰俾人問番轉頭,who caused god?
2. "logic is but based on ideology" 呢度露咗馬腳,露到滑稽。佢其實將 facts accepted by the general public 等同 self-evident fact,混淆哂。跟住就慘不忍睹。
3. logic 係 self-evident fact, infinity 係一個 deduced numerical quantity based on self-evident mathematical facts(這個如錯的話請更正),如果希臘真係 "kill all proponents advocating infinity", 我相信 logic and infinity will eventually re-emerge 因為 someone, somewhere will recognise these self-evident facts again, so is calculus。
"形上學本來就係驗證唔到既野"
其實形而上學係科學最感興趣嘅一個領域,成日都話本來就驗證唔到,誰人能保証?一百年後或者我地有辨法detect到呢?封閉嘅腦袋!
"但「驗證不到的東西,不代表不存在」始終是一大問題"
嚴格講,唔可以話佢錯,但錯就錯在驗證不到而 believe in it。不單止信,重整個人嘅思想生活模式都 structure around it,由初信到迷信到無法自拔,可歎呀!
43#Nomad
明到D但明唔哂,相信其他看你post 的都係。我明你定義 axiom 時避免用 truth 呢個字,因為 truth 並冇一個 clear definition itself。唔怪得有人話(對不起)哲學家會 render every word meaningless。唔會話你錯但如果剩係批佢用嘅一D key words 而唔批佢整段文嘅意思,有時會俾人話你冇 address 到佢所講嘅嘢。好似李氏有時俾人話佢係「唔知你噏乜」派咁。我諗佢段嘢佢用 axiom 嘅時候,佢嘅意思係 understood to be "self-evident truth",而佢成段嘢嘅 message,亦都 follow from here。我諗佢連你嗰個咁 strict 嘅 definition 都唔知。
至於 what is truth, 我諗係 understood to be true beyond a reasonable doubt,咁先 follow 到佢全文。如果我答佢,我會係咁 approach。