Paradoxes
Problem: So you want to be grounded from flying.
Solution: ???
Why should I provide a solution if the book didn't?
Solution: ???
Why should I provide a solution if the book didn't?
| LB wrote: |
|---|
| Why should I provide a solution if the book didn't? |
The book did:
Problem A: I want to be grounded from flying.
Solution A: Be declared insane, by medical personnel (becomes problem B)
Solution B: Get appointment with medical personal (becomes problem C)
Solution C: Ask for appointment, with medical personnel
And by implementing solution C, he will be lead back to his original problem, of having to fly but not wanting to.
But the point of the problem is that it's unsolvable. That's why it's a problem. The only way to solve the problem is to change the rules, but then it isn't a problem any more.
Last edited on
That's what I've been saying this whole time, except with the added point that not call catch-22 situations are lose-lose. Wouldn't you consider it a problem if someone was trying to kill you? And if they couldn't because of a catch-22 wouldn't that be win-win for you?
| And if they couldn't because of a catch-22 wouldn't that be win-win for you? |
Yes, but a catch-22 is defined for the person trying to kill you, so you must find a situation in which the person having the problem has a win-win situation. Obviously in the book example, the air force wants more pilots so it is a win-win for them. However, for the pilots it is a loose-loose situation.
A generation grows up with the main goal to reproduce, so their children can grow up with the main goal to reproduce, so their children can....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=> Everything is possible.
==>For nothing to be possible is also possible.
===>Nothing is possible.
====>Everything is impossible.
=====>For everything to be impossible is also impossible.
======>Nothing is impossible.
Ultimately is nothing impossible or is everything impossible?
Do these count?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Nothing is impossible. |
=> Everything is possible.
==>For nothing to be possible is also possible.
===>Nothing is possible.
====>Everything is impossible.
=====>For everything to be impossible is also impossible.
======>Nothing is impossible.
Ultimately is nothing impossible or is everything impossible?
Do these count?
Here's a nice paradox:
* 2 parents
* 4 grandparents
* 8 great-grandparents
...
* infinite ancestors
* 2 parents
* 4 grandparents
* 8 great-grandparents
...
* infinite ancestors
Last edited on
It is true. There is very high chance that any two people will have common ancestor somewhere in genealogy tree.
I missed this earlier so I'm replying to it now:
I didn't: obviously if he believes what he's saying is false, then it counts as a lie. But if mistakes count as lies, then we could use Pinocchio to find out fundamental truths about the universe: You just ask him to make a random factual statement and see if his nose grows. If it doesn't, the statement must be true.
| LB wrote: | |
|---|---|
I think you mean 'if he believes what he is saying is false' |
I didn't: obviously if he believes what he's saying is false, then it counts as a lie. But if mistakes count as lies, then we could use Pinocchio to find out fundamental truths about the universe: You just ask him to make a random factual statement and see if his nose grows. If it doesn't, the statement must be true.
Last edited on
It's probably gone over in the book, if anyone has the time to reread it.
@Script Coder: yeah the whole point is that there are multiple sides to it. A catch-22 is not always lose-lose for all sides.
@Script Coder: yeah the whole point is that there are multiple sides to it. A catch-22 is not always lose-lose for all sides.
@LB I completely agree, I do, however, believe that it is always a loose-loose for the party with the problem.
There is a wire immediately below a net, and you're falling. To remove the net, you have to hit the wire. To remove the wire, you have to hit the net. Is this still a catch-22? If it isn't, I agree with you.
Why would you want to remove the net, if you are falling?
EDIT: Or is that irrelevant?
EDIT: Or is that irrelevant?
Last edited on
closed account (N36fSL3A)
It's nice I'm not posting anything sarcastic, do you guys like it like this?
Anyway, Mii everybody is related.
Anyway, Mii everybody is related.
| Script Coder wrote: |
|---|
| Why would you want to remove the net, if you are falling? EDIT: Or is that irrelevant? |
Last edited on
closed account (N36fSL3A)
From what I'm understanding, yes, I believe so. (Damnit why are people reporting my posts)
Last edited on by Fredbill30
| Fredbill30 wrote: |
|---|
| From what I'm understanding, yes, I believe so. |
| Fredbill30 wrote: |
|---|
| why are people reporting my posts |