Draygomb's Paradox

Draygomb's Paradox is about trying to show, using deduction, that God is not the first cause as defined in the paradox.

---

Draygomb's Paradox

Definitions:

God is defined as The Conscious First Cause

The First Cause is That which caused Time

Consciousness is that which lets one make a decision.

A Decision is the action of changing ones mind from undecided to decided.

Time is the measure of change.

Premise:

Something which is caused can't be required by that which causes it.

Conclusions:

Time is required for Change

A Decision is a Change.

Decisions require Time

Consciousness can't let one make a decision without Time

Consciousness requires Time.

God is Conscious.

God requires Time

God can't be the cause of Time if God requires Time.

God isn't the cause of Time

God isn't The First Cause.

---

Rewriting the paradox to show it's not a paradox.

Definitions:

God is defined as The Eternal Consciousness that caused the First Cause

The First Cause is That which caused Cause and Effect

Consciousness is that which lets one make a decision.

A Decision is the action of changing ones mind from undecided to decided.

Time is eternal

Time is the measure of change.

Premise:

Something which is caused can't be required by that which causes it.

Conclusions:

Time is required for Change

A Decision is a Change.

Decisions require Time

Consciousness can't let one make a decision without Time

Consciousness requires Time.

God is Conscious.

God requires Time

God had time to cause The First Cause.

Note: This does not imply that there is such a thing as God, simply that if there is one then he would have had time to make a decision.

Our Daily Bread

 Our Daily Bread

Plato's Cave

The Allegory of The Cave, or Plato's Cave, was presented by the Greek philosopher Plato in his work Republic (514a–520a) to "compare our nature in respect of education and its lack". It is written as a dialogue between Plato's brother Glaucon and his mentor Socrates, narrated by Socrates.

Plato's Allegory of The Cave is about the nature of thought of the philosopher, and the philosopher's understanding of perspective, which is what is required to escape the cave of what one falsely believes is real, the cave of indoctrination.

The allegory is about understanding perspective, in every matter.

One that understands perspective in the cave, understands that with two eyes they have three perspectives, therefore can build the three dimensional environment around them in their mind.

When they all exit the cave, one that understands perspective exits the cave without fear, being that they already understand the three dimensional environment around them.

It is also about the understanding of the perspective of words.

Three sentences.

I understand universally immutable principles.
I am not of this world.
I am without sin.

All three sentences mean the exact same thing.

When it comes to one finding another that covers them in their good secrets, two engaged of the mind, make that one your mate.

When a lady grabs you by the private parts, cut off her hand.

The two sentences mean the exact same thing.

Two stones.

I'm going to teach a flat earther the earth is necessarily curved, in other words i'm going to put an end to a flat earther, and yet in other words i'm going to stone a flat earther to death. It's so the individual is no longer a flat earther, not that the individual is actually dead.

Two stones. One in each hand. One round stone and one flat stone.

Have the individual observe the movement of the horizons on the different surfaces as you move your hands around a bit.

As the horizon of the earth moves with the observer as it does on the round stone, the earth is necessarily curved.

Five minutes, no more flat earther. The individual now understands that the earth, the surface we live upon, is necessarily curved.

Being that the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle was the height of flat earthers, no wonder it's included in the allegory of the cave.

Imagine Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle carrying stones in their pockets, teaching flat earthers the earth is necessarily curve. The government was crumbling.

The Subset of Belief

Every Proposition

Every Proposition fits into one of three Sets:

Set1) No Truth-Value - Opinion
Set2) Do Not Know Truth-Value - Belief
Set3) Know Truth-Value - Knowledge

As Set1, Set2, and Set3 form an all-inclusive trichotomy, so also does Opinion, Belief, and Knowledge.

Two Assertions About what Belief Is

1) Belief is the probabilistic subset of Set2.

     - Know - Do Not Know - Opinion

2) Knowledge is a subset of Belief

     - Set3 is a subset of Set2

Truth-values we Know - Knowledge

Set3 is NOT a subset of Set2, ergo Knowledge is NOT a subset of Belief.

Belief is the probabilistic subset of the Do Not Know Set(Set2).

As Set1 is not synonomous with Set2, it is impossible Belief and Opinion are synonyms.

Proper Terminology

Opinion: A proposition of which it is known the proposition has no truth-value. Eg: A waterfall is beautiful. Beautiful is not a quantifiable attribute of a waterfall.

Belief: A proposition of which the truth-value remains unknown that is to be rationalized based on probability.

Knowledge: A proposition of which the truth-value of a certain pattern in the matter of existence is understood with certainty.

What is truth?

Truth is a word.

What is a word?

A word is a certain pattern in the matter of existence.

Understanding with certainty a certain pattern in the matter of existence, such as a word, is Knowledge.

Philosophy

In all matters, Philosophy is the discipline of all rational dialogue required to properly separate things one does Know, from things they Do Not Know, and also from Opinion.

Know - Do Not Know - Opinion

A Philosopher, being a lover of wisdom, understands:

In all matters, it is wise to properly separate things you Know, from things one does you Do Not Know, and also from Opinion. It is the fool that mixes them.

The trichotomy of Know, Do Not Know, and Opinion is the foundation to all philosophical dialogue.

A Philosopher understands:

All objective terminologhy given to a certain system, is philoophical dialogue. In a different given certain system, the meaning of terminology may change.

For one to assert a thing they Do Not Know is a thing they Know, is irrational. It is not philosophical dialogue, it is arguing.

For one to assert a thing they Do Not Know is an Opinion, is irrational. It is not philosophical dialogue, it is arguing.

Things you Do Not Know are to be held as things to be questioned.

It is irrational to argue "No one can know any thing with absolute certainty.", as according to the dichotomy of certainty vs uncertainty, this would be in your list of things that remain uncertain, therefore it is you admitting to being uncertain if it is possible to know a thing for certain or not, therefore you are only asking "Is it possible to know a thing for certain or not?".

Philosophical skepticism is understanding there are things known for certain and there are things that remain uncertain, and understanding that with proof and reproof can a thing be known for certain.

The Philosophy of Knowing and Not Knowing

It is true there are things you know, and there are things you do not know.

Know - Do Not Know - Opinion

It is wise to properly separate things you know from things you do not know.

Normall Philosophy

It really is that easy, the separation of things you know from things you do not know.

Normall Epistemology

You pick a matter for discussion, any matter, and then you make two lists. One list is a list of things you are certain about in the matter, and the other list is a list of things you are uncertain about in the matter. Of course, you must always ensure you're actually certain of things you list as things you are certain about, as it is a sign of at least a cognitive issue when an individual says they are certain of a thing they are not actually certain about.

Normall Epistemological Certainty - Knowledge

The infinite ability for one to properly separate things they know from things they do not know, is an ability limited only by time and chance; an ability any human free of cognitive bias and/or mental/physical health issues can do. It's what it means to be normal.

Know - Do Not Know - Opinion

Contrary to popular belief: knowledge, belief, and opinion are three completely different things.

The proper separation is Know, Do Not Know, and Opinion.

With every proposition, separate propositions with no truth-value(true or false value) from propositions with a truth-value, and then with propositions with a truth-value separate truth-values unknown from truth-values known.

Every proposition will fit into one of these three categories:

1) No truth-value exists.

2) The truth-value is unknown.

3) The truth-value is known.

A thing with no truth-value(1) is an opinion.

A thing with a truth-value unknown(2) is a belief.

A thing with a truth-value known(3) is knowledge.

---

Opinion

Every one is entitled to their opinions, as an opinion is neither true nor false.

eg: the waterfall is beautiful
eg: the waterfall is boring

As neither beautiful nor boring are attributes of the waterfall, both beautiful and boring are personal opinion.

---

Do Not Know

Every belief is justified relative to an individuals education and mental health status, from which it follows that an individual lacking an education in a certain matter, or one with a mental health disorder, may hold irrational beliefs in a matter.

It is impossible for any single individual to know everything, which is why every individual has their own list of things they know and do not know.

An individuals measure of belief about a thing they Do Not Know is dictated by probability, therefore it has nothing whatsoever to do with accepting a thing as true or false.

Things I do not know:

eg: if aliens exist or not.
eg: if the lochness monster exists or not.
eg: if bigfoot exists or not.

I do not know if aliens exist or not. I have knowledge of a multitude of life forms here on earth. I have knowledge of the vastness of the universe. From this the existence of aliens can be said to be highly probable.

I do not know if the lochness monster or bigfoot exists or not. I have knowledge of people saying they're witnesses. I have knowledge of people found to have created hoaxes. From this the existence of both the lochness monster and bigfoot can be said to be low on the probability scale.

---

Know

Every individual knows a thing no other individual knows nor can know. There are things known by an individual others can also know. There are things every individual should know.

Things only I know:

eg: what time my clock displayed when I looked at it this morning when I awoke.
eg: what time my clock displayed when I turned my coffee pot on to make coffee.

Things I know that others can know:

eg: my home address.
eg: my approximate height.

Things every individual should know:

eg: no single truth contradicts any other truth.
eg: every truth is singular.
eg: no word has an inherent meaning.

---

The Lists From This Page

No Truth-Value (Opinion)

The waterfall is beautiful.

The waterfall is boring.

With a Truth-Value

Do Not Know (Belief)

If aliens exist: high probability.

If the lochness monster exists: low probability.

If bigfoot exists: low probability.

Know (Knowledge)

What time my clock displayed when I looked at it this morning when I awoke.

What time my clock displayed when I turned my coffee pot on to make coffee.

My home address.

My approximate height.

No single truth contradicts any other truth.

Every truth is singular.

No word has an inherent meaning.

From here you continue to populate your lists and keep them up to date continually.

Conclusions

It is irrational to assert a thing with a truth-value to be an opinion.

It is irrational to assert to know a thing you do not know.

It is irrational to assert belief means accepting something as true, as ones measure of belief is probabilistic which is [0-1] non-inclusive.

It is wise to properly separate things you Know, things you Do Not Know, and Opinion. It is the fool that mixes them.