Paradox Point

                 Pandemic Paradox   If you, and those around you, practice social distancing, then you are probably hiding from an imaginary virus. If you, and those around you, do not practice social distancing, then you will probably meet a real virus. Therefore the virus is probably as real as you and your neighbors deny that it’s real.  

          On the Ruler of the Universe               Please consider these three ambiguous words:             “Law”, “Governor” and “Ruler”.             They are ambiguous because each has two meanings; one humble, physical and trustworthy, the other proud, political and devious.                     By “Law” we may mean mathematical/physical law, or we may mean juridical/political law. The first kind of law includes the law of gravity, the law of commutativity, and the laws of thermodynamics. The second kind of law includes tax law, drug law and traffic law. Need I point out which laws are fixed, immutable, universal and eternal, and which ones are not? Which ones are discovered by hu...

On Zero-Force Arguments and circular hypnosis       I define a “zero-force argument” as one that makes its point by means that, on closer inspection, supports neither its conclusion nor its opposite, at all. It only _sounds_ relevant. Case in point: someone states that democracy is an invalid form of government because people have irrational motives and can be manipulated by clever liars. One could retort that people also have rational motives, and can resist manipulation; but even discounting that, it is also true that any other form of government is run by people. Monarchy? The king is a person, with irrational motives, and manipulable. Aristocracy? The aristocrats are people, so ditto. A constitutional republic such as our own, which is theoretically a combination of democracy, monarchy and aristocracy? Ditto. So the people-are-flawed argument applies to all forms of government equally. Therefore that argument has zero force. There are theocrats, w...

       Omniscient of Nescience?             Awhile back I concocted a philosophical conundrum. I consulted Dana Leslie, a friend and a philosopher; he in turn recommended that I contact Robert West. He did not disappoint; for Robert West resolved the paradox in not just one, but two ways, and those ways in subtle but severe contradiction! As a paralogician, I enjoy this. I first stated the paradox like this: “Can an omnipotent being truly understand what it is like to lack power?” I rephrased this colloquially as, “Can God grok wimphood?” By ‘grok’, I mean intuitive understanding; a point I’ll revert to shortly. Robert West noted that this is really about omniscience, not omnipotence; so I reformulated it to: “Does an omnipotent being possess the power to understand powerlessness?” But perhaps “the power to understand” is a quibble. So better yet: “Can omniscience know nescience?” That i...