The Law of Non Contradiction Negates itself at the Meta-Level; Recursion Negates LNC

Philosophy Forums Science, Technology, and Math
1

****Update

The Law of Non Contradiction Negates itself at the Meta-Level; Recursion Negates LNC

The Application of the LNC on LNC by degree of a recursive hierarchy results in LNC negating itself as the recursive hierarchy itself given LNC exists across the hierarchy resulting in a fixed point scale invariant state, between the identities that compose it thus resulting in the very same identities which compose LNC as not equalling themselves.

“=” identity equivalence

“=/=” identity non-equivalence

“<->” biconditional identity

A =/= -A

B =/= (A=/=-A)

((B=B), (B =/= -B))

((B =/= -B) = (A=/=-A)) = (C=/=-C)

((B = A), (-B = -A)) ↔ (B =/= -B) = (A=/=-A)

((B =/= A), (B =/= -A)) ↔ (B =/= (A=/=-A))

((B=A), ((B=/=A) = (B =/= B)))

If “=” exists in distinct stages, and each state requires a corresponding identity of the stage as S=S, S1=S1, S2=S2, etc. than equality is divided according to each state as a fixed point of identity division and any application of “=” is a application of division of the distinct heirarchies of equality itself.

****All standard formalism, rules, syntax and semantics are subject to LNC if they are to have identity, thus the meta-formalism is prior to such objects.

2

I have already explained why this sort of reasoning is flawed. I also wonder at the intention behind making arguments of this kind.

3

What is the reasoning for what is flawed and un-flawed? If there is not one than assertion remains and anything can be asserted.

4

Think about what “=” means, and is supposed to mean, at each stage of the game.

This is a perfect example of what I wrote about how trusting AI is so dangerous. It will infect your mind with non-existence, because it too does not… exist.

And give you every fancy fallacy and illusion under the sun to fall into its tendency for non-meaning.

5

I actually see the point now and it’s not a bad one.

Maybe cause I don’t use the shits myself. But this weird glitch, somehow burrowing into the human mind. I see it.

But I also largely think fuck it. Whoever submits to brain rottery, let their brain rot.

1 Like
6

If “=” exists in distinct stages, and each state requires a corresponding identity of the stage as S=S, S1=S1, S2=S2, etc. than equality is divided according to each state as a fixed point of identity division and any application of “=” is a application of division of the distinct heirarchies of equality itself.

7

And what is that point?

8

Equality is not an identity, it is a fixed part of the structure of the argument. Get it?

9

If equality is not subject to identity than you cannot say it is a fixed part of the structure as that would require an identity.

10

YOu are wrong by your own reasoning. It is called retortion as in the very act of stating a skeptical claim (e.g., “there is no absolute truth”) contradicts the claim…you use = signs to show that = can mean not =.

11

There is no skeptical claim.

Just the logical inevitability of a law applied to itself.