No, it isn't. And I hate it when corporations pull that same math BS. "I choose to expect to make 1 trillion dollars this year!" Oops, I only made 1 billion, so I have a 99 billion dollar loss to file for my taxes.
this is pretty much what science does, it builds models fit what we observe and turns the dials on the models to see what we can expect if we change the input ... folks can argue about how useful it is but doing so on a discord chat whose very existence depends on numerous technologies all brought to you by that same model building seems counter-productive to say the least
@Doc If existence is then experience is is reflexive. If existence is not, then experience is illusory. We are each a Schrödinger's cat in one of Piaget's black boxes communicating on a wire between cups with another Schrödinger's cat in another of Piaget's black boxes, unless of course we are all dead cats.
@Whithers If I am me, because I am me, and you are you because you are you, that is fine. But If I am me because you are you, and you are you because I am me, then I am not truly me, and you are not truly you. Then we have a problem.
Existence is 1. There cannot exist 2 existences. The only way to have more than one thing is to divide the whole. 1 ÷ 2 = 3. Both halves and the totality. All things are a division of the whole.
One of the biggest problems for science has always been its dependence on principles and axioms for which it can have no legitimate evidence and without which it cannot function as a reliable structure.
