How 1 + 1 = 2 is not absolute ?

[Spinoza]

Here is a philosophical questions:

How 1 + 1 = 2 is not absolute ?

 

I'm not asking this question to prove the opposite or that it's absolute

i just want to hear other's persns insight 

 

A lot of thing seems absolute, but when you see the big picture (you won't find much thing that are absolute truth)

But to say this about 1 + 1 = 2 it's not abvious

What is your view ?

[Salvijus]

1 is a concept. 

One concept + another concept = third concept. 

Concepts are relative and changing. 

0 is absolute. It is not a concept, it is an absence of concepts. Nothingness. Nothingness never changes. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by Salvijus

[TheOne]

One  cat + one  car  are not 2 cats   nor 2 cars

[allislove]

34 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

1 is a concept. 

One concept + another concept = third concept. 

Concepts are relative and changing. 

+ (plus) also concept 

= (equals) concept too

concept is concept

[pluto]

1 + 1 can also = 3

 

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, dimitri said:

+ (plus) also concept 

= (equals) concept too

concept is concept

And concept is being

Zero of course is also a concept, but if zero is the only thing there is, zero is one. And if zero is one, then there is now a distinction between zero and one, which means there is two. And three. And four. And so on to infinity.

Ta-da!

[tsuki]

@Spinoza At the very least, it is relative to the meaning of symbols '1', '+', '=' and '2'.

[Spinoza]

@tsuki if we change the meaning of + to -, will 1-1=2 absolute ? symbols are just symbols, like the word consciousness, it is just a word that doesn't really describe what it is, i call consciousness in different language and also create new word for it, but that doesn't consciousness it's something that is not here.

@TheOne One  cat + one  car  are not 2 cats   nor 2 cars / Without being ware of it, you just used the logic of 2 + 2 = 4 cause in your logic it's wrong, but if they are One cat + One cat = now it's 2 cats, but because + one car so it's not two cats or 2 cars

When you say 1+1=2 is not absolute most of the time people are refering to the symbol or the meaning of symbol but the questions is about not about symbol 1 bag + 1 pant =/= 2, the meaning here mean two exact thing = one thing  + same one thing.  if you change 1 to 1 cat, mathematic can answer you that too, 

@dimitri I guess Absolute Truth also a concept

@Leo Gura personally i think, Infinity doesn't mean 1+1=2 and 1+1=3 both exist in the universe, if 2+2=3, my assumption is that the universe will collapse with no delay 

 

[tsuki]

1 minute ago, Spinoza said:

if we change the meaning of + to -, will 1-1=2 absolute ? symbols are just symbols, like the word consciousness, it is just a word that doesn't really describe what it is, i call consciousness in different language and also create new word for it, but that doesn't consciousness it's something that is not here.

For things to make sense, you need to be directly conscious of what the language points to.
You also have to be directly conscious of what consciousness is.

You asked how 1+1=2 is relative and I answered. It is relative regardless of how you twist it.
Your very twisting is the proof that 1+1=2 is relative.

[Spinoza]

My personal point of view is "We don't know"

I can't say it's absolute, cause we don't know exactly what 1+1=2 mean (we observe it, and it always works in daily life) and even tho (we don't know, humans may one day understand it better and laugh about our old view )

I can't say it's relative, and take it for granted, cause it doesn't really resonate with me, i don't want to say it's relative just cause somebody just said it.

[allislove]

1 hour ago, Spinoza said:

@tsuki

@TheOne

@dimitri I guess Absolute Truth also a concept

@Leo Gura

Yes, Absolute Truth is a concept. 

Any words which try to describe Absolute Truth are not It. They are just pointers. 

Absolute Truth is paradoxical. You can't really "catch" It. Imagine to describe for a fish what is water. What would be the best way to do it? The best way for the fish to understand what is water is jump out of water to the air. Any other words about water are just concepts for the fish. And when the fish returns to the water and describes what is water to other fishes is also concept. The same goes for a human. If human wants to know what is Absolute Truth the only valid way to do it is mystical experience. Anything else, like answers on this forum, are just concepts. 

[Spinoza]

@dimitri

14 hours ago, dimitri said:

Yes, Absolute Truth is a concept. 

Any words which try to describe Absolute Truth are not It. They are just pointers. 

Absolute Truth is paradoxical. You can't really "catch" It. Imagine to describe for a fish what is water. What would be the best way to do it? The best way for the fish to understand what is water is jump out of water to the air. Any other words about water are just concepts for the fish. And when the fish returns to the water and describes what is water to other fishes is also concept. The same goes for a human. If human wants to know what is Absolute Truth the only valid way to do it is mystical experience. Anything else, like answers on this forum, are just concepts. 

Great Analogy !

 

@Leonora Thanks for sharing you view

 

 

[Truth Addict]

1 + 1 = 2 is absolute.

[Dan502]

To me, the sum 1+1 seems to occur here in a different position, on my phone screen, to the answer 2. It also has a different shape.

To be absolutely equal, would they need to be the same in all respects, so that they would be indistinguishable from each other?

Or would I need to drop my assumed identification with myself, my perception and my distinction?

If I (or more likely one of you more developed members let's face it) managed to do so, would these things become paradoxically distinguishable and indistinguishable?

Are they already?

Edited September 12, 2019 by Dan502

[Forestluv]

@Spinoza

You are essentially saying that 1 + 1 equals 2 is absolute and 1 + 1 does not equal 2 is not absolute. How can the absolute not include both?

Imagine everything in reality is blue. Blue would no longer exist because there is no not-blue to contrast blue with. So everything is blue = nothing is blue.

[Leo Gura]

On 9/11/2019 at 3:58 AM, Spinoza said:

personally i think, Infinity doesn't mean 1+1=2 and 1+1=3 both exist in the universe, if 2+2=3, my assumption is that the universe will collapse with no delay 

You are misunderstanding Infinity. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

You are never going to figure this out using logic, as you are trying to do.

All of your logic is dualistic and relative.

You can say "1+1=2 is absolute" or "we don't know", but all of that is a relative construction of the ego-mind.

[CreamCat]

On 9/10/2019 at 4:15 PM, Leo Gura said:

Zero of course is also a concept, but if zero is the only thing there is, zero is one. And if zero is one, then there is now a distinction between zero and one, which means there is two. And three. And four. And so on to infinity.

I don't understand your inductive mathematical logic.

Edited September 13, 2019 by CreamCat

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, CreamCat said:

I don't understand your inductive mathematical logic.

Yes

[Hello from Russia]

You're drowning in symbols and believe in them too much as though they are real, guys. That is what Leo is basically saying to you. 
1+1=2 is true in the context of mathematics and our language but if we strip away the cultural meaning of symbols and the math theory behind them it doesn't have any meaning whatsoever, but you treat them in way although they do. That's a false assumption you're getting pointed into

Edited September 13, 2019 by Hello from Russia

[Juan Cruz Giusto]

1 is 1 because it's not 2. 1 is 1 relative to 2 and to the other numbers. It's nature is relative. 1 is defined as 1 because it is not the other numbers.