Does infinity include logical impossibilities?

[Vibroverse]

Well, then you may say "God can create a square circle, but you can never see it". This is not a satisfying answer but, yeah, it is like the best answer that we can come up with for now.

And nowadays I'm discovering this idea about this question and every other question and problem that I have, and that is: "what I'm searching for is the satisfying answers and solutions to all my questions and problems, and so, if I take the shortcut and directly go for the feeling of satisfaction in and of itself, then isn't it kinda logical that the thoughts and understandings I will receive will be of the nature of that which is satisfying to me, in other words, won't I be in the state of thinking and experiencing and, maybe, in a sense, creating that which is satisfying regarding all aspects of my life for the basis from which I'm being is that of satisfaction", if you know what I mean.

It kinda makes sense to me when I'm thinking about my observations about how reality does work. 

[Carl-Richard]

18 hours ago, Someone here said:

So reality ,being infinite and unlimited, usese logic as a subset of itself to create pseudo impossibilities?

So It produces those limitations but it itself is not bound by its creation (the logical rules )?

Reality creates minds which are able to think in logical terms.

 

18 hours ago, Someone here said:

I think a typical analysis of this problem is that logical impossibility is simply non-sense, and thus cannot be made “real” in physical terms in the first place.

Example: If I say “The snow is frozen and the snow is not frozen” I haven’t put forward anything profound. I have just spoken jibberish. The proposition “A and notA” is logically impossible and cannot be made sense of.

The thing is that the concepts "snow" and "frozen" and the relationship between them don't truly exist in reality as independent things. They're the product of minds capable of logical reasoning. Logic can make sense of certain regularities of perception, but the sensemaking is not the thing that is being made sense of.

It's also possible to perceive things that don't make logical sense, certainly during altered states of consciousness. In fact, this is actually going on every single moment of your waking existence, because you can't make sense of it all.

[Someone here]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Reality creates minds which are able to think in logical terms.

 

The thing is that the concepts "snow" and "frozen" and the relationship between them don't truly exist in reality as independent things. They're the product of minds capable of logical reasoning. Logic can make sense of certain regularities of perception, but the sensemaking is not the thing that is being made sense of.

It's also possible to perceive things that don't make logical sense, certainly during altered states of consciousness. In fact, this is actually going on every single moment of your waking existence, because you can't make sense of it all.

So correct me if I'm wrong..we are already witnessing logical impossibilities in high states of consciousness (like you take some salvia or acid and you turn into a fucking coffee table for 100 years) but consciousness is flexible enough to contain within itself what we consider logical impossibilities? Which aren't impossibilities because only our finite logic can't include or make sense of them.but infinite consciousness can. Since it's all powerful.

Logic has nothing to do with what is possible/impossible. It has to do whether arguments are valid/invalid. So we can remove the word ‘logically’ from the question. Can something impossible exist physically? Obviously not

I'm  asking whether a state of affairs that actually occurs could make a self-contradictory proposition true, then the answer is no, because what makes a self-contradictory proposition self-contradictory..and hence meaningless..is that it has two opposing truth conditions.

If I say “This dress is white all over and not white all over at the same time,” I’m not actually asserting anything, since there is no state of affairs which could correspond with that assertion. I’m merely mouthing words. I might as well be saying “Ooofno gooba rachicha.”

do you agree ?

Edited August 16, 2022 by Someone here

[Vibroverse]

This sentence is a lie. So if this sentence is a lie, then it is not a lie, and if it is not a lie, then it is a lie, then it is not a lie, then it is a lie, then it is not a lie, ad infinitum. Welcome to the Matrix, Leo, do you think that which you are smelling is air, do you think that which you are thinking is thought?

But then, look at existence itself. It is nothing, therefore it is something, therefore it is nothing, therefore it is something. But then what do we do with it? What do we do with language and thought and reality? What do we do with understanding? 

It is like existence has its borders to keep you in it, for you to experience, maybe, a certain modus of logic, and touching its own boundaries like building the Babel Tower to reach God, but God says "fuck off, you're not ready for a shit like this yet for this is the point where existence becomes a loop unto itself". 

"It is only through understanding logic in a grounded and 'logical' way you can understand what logic itself is, so fuck off and ground yourself in Me first, before trying to figure out the self existence modus of Me". 

I sometimes ask whether I can become a person in a different country coming from a different past, a different timeline where I'm totally someone else, like a woman from another country maybe, in the next second, and shit like that, you see. 

And I think God says "you fuckin idiot, you are, again doing the same frickin shit thinking that you are doing something else, so fuck off and understand the modus of being that you are experiencing where you are first, and then, maybe, I can give you some hints about what you really fuckin wanna understand". 

"The only thing you gotta do is surrender to the inner silence, to the inner peace, and let Me, more and more, be through your mind and body, let Me take you over, more and more, instead of your human mind who just doesn't know shit, nada, nothing" ?. 

Edited August 16, 2022 by Vibroverse

[amanen]

You have to appreciate how deep the no limitations thing goes.

There is nothing restricting so called logical impossibilities from being phenomena, it is only your limited mind that cannot allow them to exist. It is only your mind that cannot comprehend these things.

To God they are no problem. 

But you will never grasp that anything is possible without radically changing your consciousness and understanding that truly nothing is impossible... nothing.

[Vibroverse]

Then we may also say that, at one level of being, there only is the one awareness, one existence, that is I am, that is not in space and time, therefore it is becoming the reality that it is perceiving in the moment, it is becoming the idea of a history of being that it is perceiving. 

For instance, when I am is reading a book, it is then, at that level of thinking, not reading something from the past, from an idea of being historical, but it is becoming the words and beingness of that book, for it is it. 

And then it becomes time and historicity, and assigns that quality to it to perceive itself in the ideal form of itself as much as it can, without losing the idea of a relevance of it being itself in the modus, in a sense, that it is. 

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Someone here said:

If I say “This dress is white all over and not white all over at the same time,” I’m not actually asserting anything, since there is no state of affairs which could correspond with that assertion.

Rather than saying there is no state of affairs that could correspond with that assertion, I would say there is no way to make such an assertion. The limitation tells you more about the assertion than the reality.

[Someone here]

1 hour ago, amanen said:

You have to appreciate how deep the no limitations thing goes.

There is nothing restricting so called logical impossibilities from being phenomena, it is only your limited mind that cannot allow them to exist. It is only your mind that cannot comprehend these things.

To God they are no problem. 

But you will never grasp that anything is possible without radically changing your consciousness and understanding that truly nothing is impossible... nothing.

 

43 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

Then we may also say that, at one level of being, there only is the one awareness, one existence, that is I am, that is not in space and time, therefore it is becoming the reality that it is perceiving in the moment, it is becoming the idea of a history of being that it is perceiving. 

For instance, when I am is reading a book, it is then, at that level of thinking, not reading something from the past, from an idea of being historical, but it is becoming the words and beingness of that book, for it is it. 

And then it becomes time and historicity, and assigns that quality to it to perceive itself in the ideal form of itself as much as it can, without losing the idea of a relevance of it being itself in the modus, in a sense, that it is. 

 

 Guys ..there has to be logically impossible things that cannot exist physically. Yet how to reconcile that with reality being infinite?

Ones type of “logically impossible” proposition is one that contradicts itself explicitly. I’d say that such propositions are categorically impossible, and I’d be interested in any counterargument.

Whereas “physically impossible” could refer to “violating the current best understanding of the ‘laws of physics’” or to an empirical observation that it never happens. 

[Someone here]

41 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

 I would say there is no way to make such an assertion. 

You should be very careful about such statements. Because I just made that assertion .I just did .so it can be asserted but it can't be actualized. 

I think impossible things, can become very easly possible but under different conditions. So when in physics or mathematics we say that something is impossible, a very very strict conditions should be defined, otherwise, we can't be sure.

A very nice example to this is when someone would tell you that 10+5=3, you may say that impossible, but this is because you limited your thinking to base ten arithmetics. However, if you will consider those numbers as 12-based clock numbers, then 3pm result is totally correct. You see, changing the base of numbering from 10 to 12 made it totally possible.

Another good example is that two parallel lines never meets, this were an axiom in euclidean geometry for many hundreds of years, many mathematicians where totally sure that it is indeed impossible for them to meet. However, later on, mathematicians realized that they were partially wrong, since we need to specify about which space we are talking about: in flat space, like on a table's surface, that is really true, but on sphere like earth surface, it is wrong, since almost any two parallel lines gonna intersect eventually in poles.

Same situation in physics and real world, actually it is even trickier there.. Newton laws for many hundred of years seemed to be true, but then we understood that they true in special conditions, like when objects move in slow speeds, otherwise we need to use special relativity.

Those are examples that show that impossible things might only be impossible given certain conditions like for instance our mind's capacity to comprehend. So we cannot comprehend using our human logical faculties that a square circle exists..but that's not necessarily mean its impossible for infinite consciousness to create if it truly is infinite.  That's the point I'm trying to make over and over again and I agree with @amanen about it .but you seem to overlook it. 

[Vibroverse]

Whoever, or whatever, it is, it says that yes. There, in a sense, is some being, or beings, who say that. But then it, in a sense, is in the point where it, in a sense, loses its meaning where you can, in a sense, say such things without freaking out for you, in a sense, are in a mode of not freaking out, if you know what I mean ?

[Someone here]

@Vibroverse what are you smoking? 

[Vibroverse]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Rather than saying there is no state of affairs that could correspond with that assertion, I would say there is no way to make such an assertion. The limitation tells you more about the assertion than the reality.

If I tell you that "yesterday I wore a while tshirt that was not white that had an image of a square circle on it", I'm, in a sense, making an assertion, telling you something about myself ? Now, of course, you may tell me that what I'm telling you about myself is that I'm probably crazy, but a statement is a statement, it feels to me like on "some" level, or on "no" level, but if we say something actually is nothing at the ultimate level, then I'm, in a sense, telling that to you on "some" level that also is, ahahah, "no" level. 

[Vibroverse]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

@Vibroverse what are you smoking? 

Mindfuck ?

[Vibroverse]

@Someone here 

 

You can like this. 

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

You should be very careful about such statements. Because I just made that assertion .I just did .so it can be asserted but it can't be actualized. 

What I meant is that the assertion doesn't make sense.

However, the main point is that you cannot assert what can or cannot be actualized by virtue of merely asserting it, regardless of whether it makes sense or not.

 

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

So we cannot comprehend using our human logical faculties that a square circle exists..but that's not necessarily mean its impossible for infinite consciousness to create if it truly is infinite.

We agree.

[Someone here]

14 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

However, the main point is that you cannot assert what can or cannot be actualized by virtue of merely asserting it, regardless of whether it makes sense or not.

What do you mean?  Assertion in and of itself has nothing to do with whether the asserted thing is logically possible/makes sense or not . Asserting the impossible is not impossible. It would be just empty talk .like I can say it's possible to flap my arms and fly to the moon breaking the law of gravity,and the moon is actually made of frensh cheese as they pictured it in Tom and Jerry .   So I can make that assertion. But it just doesn't correspond to the facts of the matter in the external world. I think you are confusing the two here. 

[Carl-Richard]

5 minutes ago, Someone here said:

What do you mean?  Assertion in and of itself has nothing to do with whether the asserted thing is logically possible/makes sense or not . Asserting the impossible is not impossible. It would be just empty talk .like I can say it's possible to flap my arms and fly to the moon breaking the law of gravity,and the moon is actually made of frensh cheese as they pictured it in Tom and Jerry .   So I can make that assertion. But it just doesn't correspond to the facts of the matter in the external world. I think you are confusing the two here. 

Logic is an assertion.

[Someone here]

12 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Logic is an assertion.

Logic is a structured way to derive conclusions from premises. The premises have to be correct to garuntee that the conclusion will be correct. 

My main point In this thread is whether logic restrictes reality as a whole .but I think I got my answers. If reality is infinite then it  isn't restricted to logic  .because it is what created logic in the first place .

[Vibroverse]

It's not that simple. It is possible for you to imagine the version of the moon that is made of cheese, so it is a possible world that can exist, but you cannot imagine the version of the moon whose shape is a cubic sphere, so it is not a possible world that can exist in the way that the cheese moon can exist. The idea of a logical impossibility is way way way deeper than the idea of a physical impossibility, for you can imagine one, but cannot ever possible imagine the other, ever, even if you are in the state of being completely one with God. My claim is even God cannot create a square circle, no being ever can create a square circle. 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Vibroverse

[Someone here]

2 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

It's not that simple. It is possible for you to imagine the version of the moon that is made of cheese, so it is a possible world that can exist, but you cannot imagine the version of the moon whose shape is a cubic sphere, so it is not a possible world that can exist in the way that the cheese moon can exist. The idea of a logical impossibility is way way way deeper than the idea of a physical impossibility, for you can imagine one, but cannot ever possible imagine the other, ever, even if you are in the state of being completely one with God. My claim is even God cannot create a square circle, no being ever can create a square circle. 

I’m assuming here that “logically impossible” in your words means something that has a valid and sound argument proving its impossibility. And the answer is, well, it depends.

Technically the answer is no, something that is logically impossible cannot exist. However, we are all human and we don’t know everything. This means you cannot be 100% sure that your premises in your argument are sound in reality. If new evidence arises that all of a sudden throws a premise into question, then your argument is no longer sufficient to prove the thing’s impossibility.