Pentium M vs Pentium 4 - Page 9

Delta:

I'm back to cause trouble. No seriously, thinking more about your argument in the car, I still cannot agree with the general hard-line syntax (and only one way to do it) mentality.

For you to state that you know exactly what someone *meant* via their words, especially without the great assistance of tonality and body language is quite arrogant in it's own right.

Again, my bible references come into play. Why are there so many interpretations? If language semantics and syntax were so clearly definable, as you seem to believe, we wouldn't have a world of opinions.

In addition, as you well know, there are many words in English that have multiple meanings, sub-meanings, and subjective conotations. Therefore, for you to analyze my choice of words, and FOR YOU TO TELL ME what I meant, with absolute authority, as per the rules of syntax (i.e., therefore, there is only one meaning with the use of every word, phrase and sentence) is again ludicrous.

I repeat my motiff ... you are too logical, to confined into a certain mode of thought, and too limiting to yourself. FREE YOUR MIND, and realize in the grand scheme of things, there really are no ABSOLUTES (there's always the exception).

Beside, life would be boring if people actually communicated in an absolute medium. We'd all be robots. While variations in communication also cause hate and war, it also adds spice to life.

I say these things partially to help you, at least from my experience, I've worked with rigid logic based engineers. In one of my companies, which was related to markets and software for automated trading systems. Anyone that is familiar with this industry knows there's a huge debate between the *subjective* traders, and the purely mechanical *objective* traders. Both have valid points. There are successful subjective traders who change their rules in what seems to be a ramdom pattern, and cannot teach their thought processes to any student, let alone put them into absolute rules to code - IF THEN ELSE mentality. Yet, they succeed.

I have noticed that the engineers I have worked with naturally have computer science or other degrees and come from a certain rigid mindset that cannot stand the subjective trader. They get easily frustrated when *chaos theory* seems to come into play (or not so rigid rule sets). On the other hand, it's very difficult for the subjective mindset to think in terms of IF THEN ELSE. As the saying goes, "All things in moderation", I think somewhere in the middle is appropriate. You seem to be on the far side of the spectrum, at least that is how you come across, hence my continual references for you to get back to coding and shut up already - HA!

If you truly FREE YOUR MIND a little bit, you might live a happier life.

I'm officially done with this topic! Oh yeah to end on topic, P4 rules!

No hard feelings!

EDR, your statements sort of summarize an entire field of philosophy. In fact, many concerns you brought up cannot be solved by the most brilliant of thinkers. There is a fundamental paradox behind Western thought: if we were to study matters beyound the confines of Semantics, yet we must express them with our limited semantics, how is it possible? Such is the trouble of western thought. I simply adhere to the rules of argument. Yet since so many paradoxes surround the various matters that deal with pure logic and a priori thought, it is not hard to spot the many questionable matters within it. But such is our accepted mode of thought, and such is the protocal for us to communicate, that like it or not one must follow it.

Looking at Grado headphones got me distracted...Anyways

Frankly, I don't think delta sounds like a rigid person (opinion of course). I've read philosophy books that emphasize the importance of having clear language so no one can second guess what you have in mind. No one can know what's in your head, and what we know is based on what we can see; hence whatever you wrote. Therefore, it becomes crucial to be precise, at least in online forums.

I don't think delta was picking on ya; he's just playing it by the book.

The most difficult part is to find language that can leave little room for alternative interpretations. The bible is pretty vague most of the time, and the choice of words in the bible leaves too much room for alternative interpretations.

X, you claim that what we know is based on what we can see? Are you an empiricist? Do you deny the possibility of synthetic a priori knowledge? Or do you simply doubt the existence of an external world, following the tradition of David Hume?

Oh no! Have I opened a can of worms?

Blank slate all the way baby! We come into this world that way! No such thing as learning through reasoning. You cannot learn what you cannot experience.

Yep..if we were to open up the new discussion on the various schools of philosophy...imagine the possibilities. But this is still the Notebook General section, so...

You Kan't do that!

Did I just abuse Kant?

Were you the one who said "Hume Kant touch me"?

Therein lies the paradox, which is not limited to Western thought. All religions, philosophies and belief systems have never been precise, and all have contradictions and *can be* interpreted differently, hence so many variations. This applies to Zen, Buddhism, Christianty, Judaism, Muslim, Metaphyiscal, and even Nostradamus. I do not know of one single varying belief system or *philosphy* that has perfect syntax with no ability for variation.

While there is merit to the *importance of having clear language so no one can second guess what you have in mind* it does not yet exist in all well-known philosophical related topics. Keep Dreamin'

When man tries to confine man's limited understanding of the grand scheme of things into specific rules, based on that limited understanding, it only shows ignorance and arrogance. It's the height of human ego. It's so funny how generation after generation, previous thought processes are *proven* wrong, as we evolve and progress. To stand true to such convictions as being the absolute be-all-end-all is limiting, and ignorant.

Follow what? YOUR protocol? Your *understanding* of some protocol? Again, you don't comprehend my message, There are no absolute rules. You are trying to either create them, or live within what you think you understand about such rules. You are limiting yourself.

Again, i left for lunch and came back to see another big page of blah. Well, on the side note the society is not equal. There are ppl who work as slaves and those who enjoy excess of money and watever. And watever, tell me whether i should get sager 5680!!!!!!

Is that "blah" or "bahl" I believe it's spelled "whatever" Talk about syntax, C'mon people. If there are rules on this forum to abide by, then Clone should be 86'd. HA!

EDR, do you still not see the paradox? While you are trying to "free my mind", you are also expressing your own views about the nature of understanding and of knowledge. You are also speaking from your limited understanding and using our imperfect syntax. Do you see the paradox? You have become the arrogant and ignorant person of which you speak. Your thoughts are very similar to skepticism. By doubting our most basic beliefs you lead reason down an impasse. Even though some statements you make are reasonably justified, some assumptions must be made in order to salvage human thought from this metaphysical dead-end.

Yes I said Hume Kant touch me a while back.

Anyways, Job's been doing it since biblical days...he's only human.

You are a master of twisting things, indeed.


*must be made* ... that's what gets YOU through life on a daily basis and helps you deal with these supposed Paradoxes. That is YOUR comfort level. Your choice. Whatever floats your boat.

Got another meeting to go to. Catch ya on the flip side ... wait what kind of syntax is that, and what exactly do I mean?

Gees, what are these animated icons for? To help clarify body language and tonality? With 4 above, what do I really mean? It's all good. Carry on, my friend. Peace and goodwill to you.

Do I smell tautology?

Speaking of paradox, i like Legacy of Kain game. A great game involving paradox

Um, guys can we hive this lively discussion into the Off-Topic subforum where it belongs. Thanks.

GOD I AM STUPID I PRESSED QUOTE INSTEAD OF EDIT.

EDR, I have chinese accent so sometimes i can't really pronounce blah instead i say "balh" like your tongue is twisted or something.

I beg to differ. I am fluent in Mandarin but that doesn't carry over in my spelling. It does however, carry over in my grammar.

It saddens me to think that EDR still do not see the dead-end he is heading into. We must use our limited knowledge and our imperfect syntax and make observations even though they may be proven wrong in the future, because without that we the human race have nothing. Everything you say, and all the teachings of skepticism, are perfectly reasonable. But what can we make of it? Nothing but a dead-end. Without the assumptions the Pythagoreans made in the pythagorean paradox, we wouldn't even have mathematics. So much knowledge have been based on assumptions that to truly free one's mind is to have nothing at all. I hope EDR realizes this someday.