 | This user is a
member of WikiProject Countering systemic bias. |
Hi there!
General interests include military history, science (chemistry, physics), engineering, architecture.
Expert interests include computer science, software architecture, software languages & parsers, database theory, theory of information & logic.
"Open world" theory.
Occasional interest: "open world" theory. The world is not fully defined, prematurely closing terms is inaccurate (hence NULL in relational DB theory), it is logically fallacious to attempt to over-define the world (universe) beyond known facts.
This is a logical error, frequently indulged by less-intelligent people -- the excessive application of fixed-value logic, beyond the bounds where terms are fixed. True wisdom accepts the open term.
(Some parallel with Donald Rumsfeld's 'knowns & unknowns' here -- please excuse the poor company, passing by -- I assure you it will be brief.)
I disprove Noam Chomsky.
Favourite insight: using Occam's razor to disprove Noam Chomsky, on grounds of lack of future selectivity (informational choice value) of his work.
To paraphrase: He says "World is bad. America is bad. Everything is bad". I prove: x + 0 = x. Therefore, term 0 irrelevant. Thus, Noam Chomsky's work = information value 0 = irrelevant.
|
| This user is a
member of WikiProject Countering systemic bias. |
Hi there!
General interests include military history, science (chemistry, physics), engineering, architecture.
Expert interests include computer science, software architecture, software languages & parsers, database theory, theory of information & logic.
"Open world" theory.
Occasional interest: "open world" theory. The world is not fully defined, prematurely closing terms is inaccurate (hence NULL in relational DB theory), it is logically fallacious to attempt to over-define the world (universe) beyond known facts.
This is a logical error, frequently indulged by less-intelligent people -- the excessive application of fixed-value logic, beyond the bounds where terms are fixed. True wisdom accepts the open term.
(Some parallel with Donald Rumsfeld's 'knowns & unknowns' here -- please excuse the poor company, passing by -- I assure you it will be brief.)
I disprove Noam Chomsky.
Favourite insight: using Occam's razor to disprove Noam Chomsky, on grounds of lack of future selectivity (informational choice value) of his work.
To paraphrase: He says "World is bad. America is bad. Everything is bad". I prove: x + 0 = x. Therefore, term 0 irrelevant. Thus, Noam Chomsky's work = information value 0 = irrelevant.