Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts

Saturday, March 26, 2011

Question 576: Proof kahan hai?




X


Y


Z




X was an idea put forth by a very generally awesome man (although I don't personally appreciate the usage of the idea, I still think he's pretty cool).
Y and Z sort of picked up on it later on.

The theory of Z actually has a name coined for it.



So give me:
1. X, Y and Z

2. The name of the generally awesome man

3. What Z is a parody of

4. The name coined for Z

2 points per part plus a bonus of 2 for getting all four.
So 10 points in total.
Also, my Hindi (and possibly everyone else's) is better than Pai's.
Just saying.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Question 514: I Say Illusion, You Say “Four” Sure


Many Wishes,


My name is Pranav, and I'm happy to help you spend your idle time on the computer NOT macking on manga and memes.
Actually, I kid - let's go right ahead. First post right up.


___X___ was the amongst the most famous of the Pre-Socratic scholars, having forwarded an entire school of thought that was touched upon in Plato’s most complex dialogue. __X__ was only trying to forward the traditional interpretation that the general perception of reality in the physical world (being discussed in doxa) is incorrect, and that the reality of the practical world is 'One Being' (being discussed in aletheia): an unchanging and indestructible whole.

But in the process, he came up with two of the most famous Greek logical constructs known today. 
The first is that of a method of proof called reductio ad absurdum - which means reducing or extending the logical atomic parts of an argument to the point of absurdity.  

The other construct (or a body of logical work - ___X’s  Y___) - it comprised of a body of 40 propositions put forward by __X__ to prove his belief in the illusion of the “Many” by questioning several conventional axioms. Only a few of these have survived, being discussed in great length by Aristotle as well. Lewis Carroll alludes to one of these when he mentions how the tortoise has a deductive argument with the loser (___Z___) at the end of the race, leading the loser into an infinite regression. By some chance, __X__ didn’t really like infinity, and Carroll was simply playing with words when he described __Z’s__ palpable displeasure with the tortoise’s version as well.


Z vs Tortoise - Time heels wounded pride



Name X 
Tell me what X’s Y is (a collective term of reference) 
Who/what is Z?
How does the title figure in this?
Guess 2 for 5 points, 3 for 8, 4 for 10 - it’d be a crime not to get all four if you get two!