Deeper than primes

Status
Not open for further replies.
doronshadmi said:
Furthermore, the meaning to the word "context" is based on two words: "connection" and "text", so Non-locality (connector, or memory)\Locality (connected, or text) Linkage is the foundation of "context".

See http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/context :
Click to expand...


Perhaps if you actually read the very reference you cited you'd realize how wrong you were. Is it too much to ask that you read your own citations rather than just making stuff up?

Context, from the Latin, contextus.
 
doronshadmi said:
Once again you show that your meaning is context dependent.
Click to expand...

Not just my meaning Doron, words take on different meanings in different contexts, but I would not expect you to understand as your own personal meanings and context are all that matter to you.

doronshadmi said:
For example: a particular kind of plant represents ground's fruitfulness, but ground's fruitfulness is not limited to any particular kind of plant.
Click to expand...

That’s because “a particular kind of plant” does not “represents ground's fruitfulness” it represents the “fruitfulness” of just that specific plant in that specific ground under certain specific growing condition. A different kind of plant or a different plant of the same kind may not be as ‘fruitful’ in the same ground and even under the same growing conditions.

Your analogies still serve you so poorly, just as your notions do. So I guess they are at least analogues to your notions.

doronshadmi said:
Furthermore, the meaning to the word "context" is based on two words: "connection" and "text",
Click to expand...

I know the meaning and origin of the word.

doronshadmi said:
so Non-locality (connector, or memory)\Locality (connected, or text) Linkage is the foundation of "context".

See http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/context :
Click to expand...



Doron, we already know that you claim “Non-locality” “\Locality” “Linkage” “is the foundation of” everything so that would include “context”. No need to belabor your fantasy further.



doronshadmi said:
Direct perception is the most basic state of mind, and therefore can't be forced.
Click to expand...

The fact that you continue to try to force your “Direct perception” onto others doesn’t even demonstrate that it is your “most basic state of mind”.

doronshadmi said:
On the contrary "bla bla bla ..." reasoning is not the most basic state of mind, and when some context dependent "bla bla bla ..." reasoning is taken as Universality, then we really get a forced reasoning.
Click to expand...

Again stop trying to force your “Direct perception” and lack of reasoning onto others.


doronshadmi said:
The sad joke in your case, The Man, is that you even do not understand the universal principle that enables you to use a word like "context".
Click to expand...

The sad joke, Doron, is, well, just you and your “Direct perception” context.
 
doronshadmi said:
Furthermore, the meaning to the word "context" is based on two words: "connection" and "text", so Non-locality (connector, or memory)\Locality (connected, or text) Linkage is the foundation of "context".
Click to expand...
Doron Doron, do you mean that "local" is synonymous to "without context" and "non-local" is synonymous to "having context," like when you declare local variables in a block? They can't be seen by the main program, and so there is no "context," or something like that. You should explain the meaning of your terms by examples, like what ingredient is local or non-local when you make potato pancakes or anything but that . . . I mean . . . geesus! Stop it, Doron Doron! LOL.
 
Last edited:
epix said:
Doron, you type too fast and then you mess up the syntax. Wash your ideas in the spellchecker before serving.
Click to expand...

Please show exactly what messed up in

So, "Whet enables me to understand?" is not a fundamental question also in your case.​

which prevents its understanding?
 
Last edited:
jsfisher said:
Perhaps if you actually read the very reference you cited you'd realize how wrong you were. Is it too much to ask that you read your own citations rather than just making stuff up?

Context, from the Latin, contextus.
Click to expand...

By ignoring the fact that "context" is "weaving together of words, from Latin contextus connection of words" you indeed use this word without understand it.
 
Last edited:
epix said:
Doron Doron, do you mean that "local" is synonymous to "without context" and "non-local" is synonymous to "having context," like when you declare local variables in a block? They can't be seen by the main program, and so there is no "context," or something like that. You should explain the meaning of your terms by examples, like what ingredient is local or non-local when you make potato pancakes or anything but that . . . I mean . . . geesus! Stop it, Doron Doron! LOL.
Click to expand...
epix, asking questions and then providing the answers, make your questions rhetoric.

Any way my answer is:

"local" is not synonymous to "without context".

"non-local" is not synonymous to "having context".

"context" is synonymous to Non-locality (connection or memory)\Locality (text or words) Linkage.
 
The Man said:
words take on different meanings in different contexts,
Click to expand...
Again you get only the text (word) aspect of con-text and ignore the connection aspect of con-text.

By doing that you indeed unable to get Non-locality (connection or memory)\Locality (text or words) Linkage as the universal principle, which enables con-text, in the first place.

The weakness of your "bla bla ..." (words-only) reasoning is clearly seen in http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6158689&postcount=10770 , so you have no case, no matter how long is your "bla bla bla ..." (words-only) reasoning.
 
Last edited:
doronshadmi said:
By ignoring the fact that "context" is "weaving together of words, from Latin contextus connection of words" you indeed use this word without understand it.
Click to expand...

You missed the point. You said:
doronshadmi said:
Furthermore, the meaning to the word "context" is based on two words: "connection" and "text", so Non-locality (connector, or memory)\Locality (connected, or text) Linkage is the foundation of "context".
Click to expand...

Which was factually incorrect. "Context" does not derive from "connection" and "text", as the link you posted showed. Please have the good grace to admit when you are clearly wrong.
 
The Man said:
If you do not bring time into the description by claiming something is simultaneous then you do not have to proclaim “in no time”.
Click to expand...
Another example of your weak reasoning. In this case you can’t get that simultaneity is possible only in no time.

Under this no time state serial observation simultaneously dealing with no more than one value, for example self comparison.

Also under this no time state parallel observation simultaneously dealing with more than one value, for example non self comparison.
 
Last edited:
zooterkin said:
You missed the point. You said:


Which was factually incorrect. "Context" does not derive from "connection" and "text", as the link you posted showed. Please have the good grace to admit when you are clearly wrong.
Click to expand...

Really?

Then please explain: "weaving together of words, from Latin contextus connection of words"
 
Last edited:
For each local person of this thread:

"Whet enables me to understand?" is not a fundamental question of your reasoning.
 
doronshadmi said:
Really?

Then please explain: "weaving together of words, from Latin contextus connection of words"
Click to expand...

"Contextus" means "connection of words". It is not derived from "connection" plus "text", though it may derive from the Latin words that mean the same thing.
 
zooterkin said:
Even if we fix the typo, I have no idea what this statement is supposed to mean.

ETA: What is a local person of this thread?
Click to expand...
At least try to answer to this question:

"Whet enables me to understand?"
 
Last edited:
What the heck is this all about?

Throw some meaning rubbish in a 30 foot high post and laugh at the people who respond?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom