从哲理上讲,这句话正不正确?能不能够进行反驳?

2024-01-09 09:27:04 +08:00
 kisshere

3132 次点击
所在节点    问与答
37 条回复
renmu
2024-01-09 12:06:57 +08:00
缸中之脑不能证伪
conge
2024-01-09 12:23:53 +08:00
不要反驳,请醒来。
newtype0092
2024-01-09 13:35:41 +08:00
B 站搜直播间:AI 杠精反驳一切
你发弹幕就行。
adoal
2024-01-09 13:47:11 +08:00
“哲理”层面,并不关注“是否正确”
sunamask
2024-01-09 13:48:59 +08:00
@tyzandhr #20 感觉还挺难理解的,这段证明是说,“如果我既不知道什么是‘缸’,也不知道什么是‘脑’,所以除非能拿出什么别的证据来,否则就不能说我是‘缸中之脑’”。对吗?

这听起来像是诡辩,但我不知道该怎么证明它是……
wildman9527
2024-01-09 14:58:03 +08:00
这个一看就是假的,如果是写给我的,他们不至于傻到以为我在做梦的时候能自学会英文吧😂
tyzandhr
2024-01-09 15:11:25 +08:00
@sunamask 用程序员的视角理解,就是概念不能递归,不然会爆调用栈。这在逻辑学上叫做自我指涉。
hxndg
2024-01-09 17:24:22 +08:00
@sunamask
不要陷入语义学的谬误,如果被语义啥的糊弄了想想白马非马
iloveoovx
2024-01-09 17:38:03 +08:00
这句话当然是正确的,因为能想到的都会发生,这也会发生

另外,尝试把现实置于梦境之上是 fool's errand
Ericcccccccc
2024-01-09 20:40:39 +08:00
搜 boltzmann brain
movq
2024-01-09 21:05:34 +08:00
怎么还有人说“从哲理来讲”的。只听过有人说“从法理来讲”、“从逻辑上说”。“哲理”是什么?
Bronson
2024-01-10 02:11:36 +08:00
人类会绝望是因为真理具有神性吗?

为什么要留恋尘世,要害怕死亡?在如果已经活得足够长的前提下
真理因此具有神性
人类还信仰上帝
charlie21
2024-01-10 07:28:10 +08:00
对于这种自带语境和叙事的内容,只能说 not even wrong.
charlie21
2024-01-10 07:33:11 +08:00
对于这种自带语境和叙事的内容,(你相信就是相信它为真、你不相信则它就是假),只能说 not even wrong.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Absurdism/comments/10wcuqv/youre_not_even_wrong_wolfgang_pauli/

"You're not even wrong!" - Wolfgang Pauli
/r/Absurdism 荒诞主义

The original context of this phrase was to point out the pseudoscience or simply bad science with faulty arguments and logic done by physicist colleagues and students of Pauli.
这句话的最初背景是指出伪科学或仅仅是糟糕的科学,物理学家的同事和泡利的学生做了错误的论证和逻辑。

For a rigorous and logically meaningful discussion on whether a statement is true or false, the statement must satisfy the criterion of falsifiability, that is, a standardized deductive process of evaluation.
为了对一个陈述是真是假进行严格且具有逻辑意义的讨论,该陈述必须满足可证伪性标准,即:标准化的演绎评估过程。

But I would like to appropriate this phrase and make it an aphorism for a different context. The context of duality in existence and the unfalsifiable demonstration of the ISness, and by extent, or vice-versa, BEINGness.
但我想把这句话挪用一下,让它成为不同语境的格言。存在的二元性的背景和不可证伪的“存在性”,以及“存在性”的程度,反之亦然。

Suppose there are only black cats in the entire universe. How could we recognize the property of "blackness" by description? We do know it by experiencing it. Just don't know other ways. We experience the property, the cat too lives this property, although the statement of it being black can't be discussed conclusively on whether it is true or false. There is no way to satisfy the criterion of falsifiability. And why is that? Simply because there is no way to compare the color black with any other color, for there is only blackness in the universe, in this thought experiment. But the ISness of blackness is undeniably so. We might go further by saying that the property of blackness is not real, it is an illusion. By being this the only color in the universe, it ceases to make sense as a qualification. Thus, it doesn't matter saying it's an illusion or if it's real. It just IS. ISness/BEINGness is unfalsifiable. Hence, "you're not even wrong!"
假设整个宇宙中只有黑猫。我们如何通过描述来识别“黑色”的性质?我们确实通过体验它来了解它。只是不知道其他方法。我们体验了这个属性,猫也生活在这个属性中,尽管它是黑色的说法不能最终讨论它是真的还是假的。没有办法满足可证伪性的标准。这是为什么呢?仅仅因为没有办法将黑色与任何其他颜色进行比较,因为在这个思想实验中,宇宙中只有黑色。但不可否认的是,黑色的本质就是这样。我们可以更进一步说,黑色的性质不是真实的,它是一种幻觉。由于这是宇宙中唯一的颜色,它作为一种资格就不再有意义了。因此,说它是幻觉还是真实并不重要。它就是这样。ISness/BEINGness [ 是不可证伪的 ] 。因此,“你甚至没有错!”
charlie21
2024-01-10 08:04:22 +08:00
Worse than wrong, being an untestable claim.
gabon
2024-01-10 09:49:42 +08:00
You're waiting for a train, a train that will take you far away. You know where you hope this train will take you, but you don't know for sure. But it doesn't matter.
param
2024-01-10 15:10:22 +08:00
期待 V2EX 什么时候开哲学节点

这是一个专为移动设备优化的页面(即为了让你能够在 Google 搜索结果里秒开这个页面),如果你希望参与 V2EX 社区的讨论,你可以继续到 V2EX 上打开本讨论主题的完整版本。

https://tanronggui.xyz/t/1007031

V2EX 是创意工作者们的社区,是一个分享自己正在做的有趣事物、交流想法,可以遇见新朋友甚至新机会的地方。

V2EX is a community of developers, designers and creative people.

© 2021 V2EX