Theravada against mathematics

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Pseudobabble
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:11 am
Location: London

Re: Here Theravada is refuted

Post by Pseudobabble » Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:16 am

Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:01 am
JamesTheGiant wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 6:59 am
You honor, I rest my case. Bot.
This case does not help. Here Theravada is refuted.
Well done, O Great and Powerful Refuter. Your nonsense has convinced us all. DNS, lets shut it down, its over, Germann has arrived.
"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta


'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.' - Genesis 3:19

'Some fart freely, some try to hide and silence it. Which one is correct?' - Saegnapha

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

The countable set of all possible lives

Post by Germann » Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:36 am

Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:16 am
Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:01 am
JamesTheGiant wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 6:59 am
You honor, I rest my case. Bot.
This case does not help. Here Theravada is refuted.
Well done, O Great and Powerful Refuter. Your nonsense has convinced us all. DNS, lets shut it down, its over, Germann has arrived.
In ancient India, the loser dispute became the pupil of the winner. Whoever this winner is.

You will not do anything with the mathematical fact that the countable set of all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas (the countable set of all possible lives) fit in an infinite set of moments of the past. It does not matter if there are random events or there are no random events.

http://mymathforum.com/number-theory/34 ... ments.html

A countable set is the "smallest" among infinite sets.

User avatar
Dan74-MkII
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 10:22 am

Re: The countable set of all possible lives

Post by Dan74-MkII » Sun Apr 14, 2019 12:11 pm

Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:36 am
Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:16 am
Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:01 am

This case does not help. Here Theravada is refuted.
Well done, O Great and Powerful Refuter. Your nonsense has convinced us all. DNS, lets shut it down, its over, Germann has arrived.
In ancient India, the loser dispute became the pupil of the winner. Whoever this winner is.

You will not do anything with the mathematical fact that the countable set of all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas (the countable set of all possible lives) fit in an infinite set of moments of the past. It does not matter if there are random events or there are no random events.

http://mymathforum.com/number-theory/34 ... ments.html

A countable set is the "smallest" among infinite sets.
No, Germann.

In order to build up a mathematical argument, you need to proceed in logical steps from the start to the finish. You started with an 'infinite monkey' example that assumes random moves. Nicholas objected right away that actions and dhammas do not proceed randomly. Since then you have thrown many things into the mix - countability, probability of deterministic events (?), fitting and including... All of these are either irrelevant or sheer nonsense and none constitute an actual argument, a connected logical sequence that leads from the premise to conclusion.

Apart from your questionable assumptions, mathematically you have no proof. No argument. Because when it comes to causally connected events, which in probabilistic terms is dependence, there is simply no way to prove that a process that is run infinitely many times will include any given sequence of dhammas. We have tried to illustrate this to you many many times. But you are either not interested or not capable of understanding what we have said.

Many of us have tried to help, some have given you benefit of doubt that maybe you do have an idea behind it all and are just not expressing it well. But I don't think so.

I agree, it's time to shut this down and not waste any more time with it.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:53 am

Re:

Post by Sherab » Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:05 pm

Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:21 am
Sherab wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:31 am

As mentioned before, I see where you were coming from and I have also mentioned where I disagreed with you.
If we attribute the free choice to a separate, conditioned dhamma, making it a subject, then regardless of the moral choice, the fate of all the subjects is the same — the termination. There is no kammic reward for dhammas.
I was answering this part of your post: "If, however, we consider liberation (Nibbana) a simple cessation, any subject, regardless of his moral path, reaches Nibbana by death."

As regards free choice, I don't think there is such a thing. There is choice, but there is no free choice. Choice makes sense only in relation to sentient beings but not the Buddha.

budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Theravada against mathematics

Post by budo » Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:06 pm

Debunking his argument is quite simple.

He claims in an infinite universe anything that could happen already has happened. Well, then by making that statement he already disproves himself, for an event has to happen at some point in time, and so there will be people experiencing that event as it is happening, but according to him that's not possible as it must have already happened. Therefore he puts himself in a logical paradox, in which case nothing ever happens.

The truth is that there are cyclical mechanisms aka rounds. That's why I asked him about the black holes taking in all matter, as according to his theory if everything that could happen already happened, then the Earth should have been swallowed by a black hole by now. He can't answer that, and until he does answer it, he won't be able to explain Nibbana, but that will never happen.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:53 am

Re:

Post by Sherab » Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:10 pm

Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:27 am
Sherab wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:31 am

I think you are making the assumption that the first portion is injective into the second portion. I don't think that is true.
Why? Events are already connected with the past. The events have already gone.
Yes, the first portion is injective into the second portion.
It might be easier to see that it may not be true if you look at a time line that is from now to the infinite future and a time line that is 100 years from now to the infinite future. Is the cardinality of the the former greater than the latter? I don't think so since whatever chain of event that can occur in the former portion can also occur in the latter portion because both time line are infinite.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Clarification

Post by Sherab » Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:12 pm

Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:53 am
Sherab wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:31 am
Implication of (2):
Assume that the realization of Nibbana refers to possible events.
Assume also that all possible events can only exist within the beginningless chain of conditioned dhammas.
If we divide the chain of conditioned dhammas into a portion that is beginningless until now and a portion that is from now to the some future point in time, then the first portion is must be infinite, since it is beginningless. If it is infinite, then Nibbana as an event must be somewhere in that portion.
Do you agree that the achievement of Nibbana should have happened in the past, because set of the moments of the past are infinite? If you agree, I have nothing to argue about. I argued only with the "fact" that the achievement of Nibbana may be in the second part of the events, but not in the endless past.
Do you agree that the achievement of Nibbana should have happened in the past, because set of the moments of the past are infinite? I have given you my answer previously, and it was a NO. Why? Because as I mentioned previously, Nibbana is not an event in the realm of conditioned phenomena.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:53 am

Re:

Post by Sherab » Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:23 pm

Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:37 am
Sherab wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 9:31 am

I am curious as to what your actual view is, or more specifically, whether or not the Buddha taught an ontology. If yes, what is that ontology. As this is off-topic, perhaps you could message me instead.
Buddha did not teach the mereological nihilism.
I think I can agree with you on this.
Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:37 am
Buddha taught about the multitude of buddhas and sentient beings.
Since the Buddha did not teach mereological nihilism, what then is buddha? What then is a sentient being?

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Theravada against mathematics

Post by Sherab » Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:29 pm

budo wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 1:06 pm
Debunking his argument is quite simple.

He claims in an infinite universe anything that could happen already has happened. Well, then by making that statement he already disproves himself, for an event has to happen at some point in time, and so there will be people experiencing that event as it is happening, but according to him that's not possible as it must have already happened. Therefore he puts himself in a logical paradox, in which case nothing ever happens.

The truth is that there are cyclical mechanisms aka rounds. That's why I asked him about the black holes taking in all matter, as according to his theory if everything that could happen already happened, then the Earth should have been swallowed by a black hole by now. He can't answer that, and until he does answer it, he won't be able to explain Nibbana, but that will never happen.
His argument is logically correct.

Because his argument is logically correct, you can only find fault with the premises of his arguments. To properly address his argument, you have to understand the premises behind his argument. I tried to lay out the premises of his arguments here: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=33879&start=450#p509246

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5447
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: Theravada against mathematics

Post by Ceisiwr » Sun Apr 14, 2019 2:42 pm

Sherab

I'll admit I don't quite understand this?
Implication of (1):
If you hold the belief of beginningless chain of conditioned dhammas, then any ability to select an event must necessarily be an emergent phenomenon of the begninningless chain of conditioned dhammas. This means that any self with an ability to make choices must be an emergent phenomenon of the beginningless chain of conditioned dhammas. Taken to its logical conclusion, the tenet of cessation would lead to a tenet of annihilation. Such a tenet would be the same as the tenet of non-existent of satta.

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5447
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: Theravada against mathematics

Post by Ceisiwr » Sun Apr 14, 2019 2:52 pm

In terms of infinity, could it be that extinquishment hasn't occurred for all beings since beings, hindered by ignorance, can only make choices within a narrow set of parameters unless they hear the Dhamma, thus limiting the number of potential outcomes? So, given infinite time everything that can happen has within a certain set of parameters. Nibbana, being outside this set of parameters, hasn't happened for all beings.

Just my two cents.

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 3117
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Theravada against mathematics

Post by cappuccino » Sun Apr 14, 2019 3:59 pm

Sherab wrote: As regards free choice, I don't think there is such a thing.
karma is based on choices

as in I choose to & intend to do X

User avatar
Pseudobabble
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:11 am
Location: London

Re: The countable set of all possible lives

Post by Pseudobabble » Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:22 pm

Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:36 am
Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:16 am
Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 7:01 am

This case does not help. Here Theravada is refuted.
Well done, O Great and Powerful Refuter. Your nonsense has convinced us all. DNS, lets shut it down, its over, Germann has arrived.
In ancient India, the loser dispute became the pupil of the winner. Whoever this winner is.

You will not do anything with the mathematical fact that the countable set of all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas (the countable set of all possible lives) fit in an infinite set of moments of the past. It does not matter if there are random events or there are no random events.

http://mymathforum.com/number-theory/34 ... ments.html

A countable set is the "smallest" among infinite sets.
Well, then its a pity we aren’t in ancient India, and that you haven’t won anything. A pity for you, that is.
"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta


'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.' - Genesis 3:19

'Some fart freely, some try to hide and silence it. Which one is correct?' - Saegnapha

User avatar
Germann
Posts: 415
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2019 2:24 pm

The countable set of all possible lives

Post by Germann » Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:24 pm

Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:22 pm
Germann wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:36 am
Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun Apr 14, 2019 11:16 am


Well done, O Great and Powerful Refuter. Your nonsense has convinced us all. DNS, lets shut it down, its over, Germann has arrived.
In ancient India, the loser dispute became the pupil of the winner. Whoever this winner is.

You will not do anything with the mathematical fact that the countable set of all possible sequences of combinations of dhammas (the countable set of all possible lives) fit in an infinite set of moments of the past. It does not matter if there are random events or there are no random events.

http://mymathforum.com/number-theory/34 ... ments.html

A countable set is the "smallest" among infinite sets.
Well, then its a pity we aren’t in ancient India, and that you haven’t won anything. A pity for you, that is.
It seems to you.
Mathematically, I have everything correctly, and I want as many mathematicians as possible to participate in the discussion.

User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 3117
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am

Re: Theravada against mathematics

Post by cappuccino » Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:27 pm

schism
noun
a split or division between strongly opposed sections or parties, caused by differences in opinion or belief.
Last edited by cappuccino on Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], dhammacoustic, SDC and 161 guests