Benefit and belief

[DevPlayer]

> DevPlayer  wrote:
> >I still assert that contradiction is caused by narrow perspective.
> >By that I mean: just because an objects scope may not see a certain
> >condition, doesn't mean that condition is non-existant.

> Groetjes Albert wrote:
> This is a far cry from the bible stating that someone is his
> own grand father. Or going to great length to prove that Jezus
> (through Jozef) is a descendant of David. Then declaring it
> a dogma that Jozef has nothing to do with it.

Do you not see? For ...
One man's garbage is another man's treasure.
One man's delusion is another man's epiphany.
One man's untruth is another man's belief.
One man's thing to attack is another mans thing to shield and defend.
One man's logical undenighable truth is another man's small part of a
bigger picture.

As has been said for example does 1+1 = 2. Only in one small
persepective. Whaa? what wack job says stuff like that?
1+1 = 10. In the bigger picture there is more then one numberic base
besides decimal, such as binary. Or then one might say there are only
10 integer numbers from 0 to 9 or from 1 to 10 if you like. Again in
the limited view, true, but in the larger view no. The Elucid
numbering scale is not the only numbering scale ever invented, or
needed for that matter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_geometry
"Euclid's axioms seemed so intuitively obvious that any theorem proved
from them was deemed true in an absolute, often metaphysical, sense.
Today, however, many other self-consistent non-Euclidean geometries
are known, the first ones having been discovered in the early 19th
century. An implication of Einstein's theory of general relativity is
that Euclidean space is a good approximation to the properties of
physical space ..."



> Groetjes Albert wrote:
> (It being ... well ... you know ...)
Um... Huh? sorry didn't know what you meant. You got me on that one.
Ellipses just put my brain into recursive mode.


> Groetjes Albert wrote:
> (I have this book, it is called "the amusing bible" with all
> flippant and contradictory stuff pointed out by a French
> 1930 communist. Cartoons too. )
I likely would find it very funny.


> Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
How true indeed.