Don't even go there, dearest!!! Or you are going to find yourself in the same boat as the colleague being criticized by an enormously influential mathematical physicist (who shall be nameless here): "That answer is so bad that it isn't even wrong."
Jeepers I LOVE that one! LOLOL!!!
Beware, dear one, of the "snare" of Aristotle's Third Law of the Excluded Middle. Not to say the law is "always" a "snare." The point is, the Third Law is perfectly appropriate when dealing with questions that are answerable in True/False terms. No other option available.
But not all questions fall into the range of phenomena susceptible to valid true/false answers.
A. N. Whitehead drew attention to the limit implicit in the Third Law by articulating a Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness:
The main form of the fallacy entails “taking the abstractions about some actuality that are focused on by some particular science (or science in general) due to its limited interests or methods, to be a complete description of the actuality in its concreteness”.Perhaps the above might seem a huge pile of whatever to you. But my dearest 'pipe, you were the one who told me about "The Donkey–Rider Scenario." I was able to confirm it from my own experience, though in different terms — "robot" and "me." Pretty crude.... But what do you expect from a 13-year-old???
An example would be to mistake the notion of time found in physical formulas and mathematical representations of reality for “time” as “experienced” and found in reality itself. — Philosophy Forums.
WHY would you want to put the donkey and the rider "on the same plane,"such that they equally could be made subject to "true/false" arguments?
HUGS!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you so much, dear brother, for writing!
More HUGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHY would you want to put the donkey and the rider “on the same plane,”such that they equally could be made subject to “true/false” arguments?
Because...... of my friends and family their donkeys are indeed riding the rider...
With their life force logic as flawed as a tortoise surfing on it’s shell.. yelling kiwabunga..
I know few people that think more deeply than a chimpanzee..
Sure they speak language, play games, fornicate, and the smart ones can fish termites out with a stick...
But I suppose some are on the level of a Gibbon.. or even a Lemur..
Chimp being a step “UP”...
They do indeed have a logic... they think.. they consider..
But the quality of their considerations seem to be second reality..
People can be logically WRONG “you know”..
Very logical except it’s just partially or completely WRONG..
I’m starting to believe there is a plateau of logic....
1) first reality logic...
2) second reality logic...
2) and third reality logic..
** there may be other levels I am unaware of.. -OR-
degrees of gradation within levels..
How did I get so smart.?..
NOW that would be a logical and very good question..
***