What does that mean? Please be clear.The philosopher is opposite the gambler. — ucarr
The second sentence cannot be connected to the first one. It's not what one would logically expect. Both their subjects and predicates differ. At least one must be preserved: they must both talk about either the gambler or winning/losing. Examples:The gambler plays to win. While losing, the philosopher learns to enjoy it. — ucarr
I feel like a teacher correcting a school essay here, and I could just ignore all that, but I also feel that I have something to say, because I believe that clear and correct descriptions are very important in here. — Alkis Piskas
clear and correct descriptions — Alkis Piskas
One of the seemingly silliest goals ever set by a scientist, the quest for a unified field theory of everything... — ucarr
Great discovery will always be checkered by impossibility & failure. Imperfection is the reality that pushes you forward... — ucarr
That sounds childish. — Shwah
...I don't know a dualism which posits end game vs beginning game... — Shwah
Regarding imprecise language, your use of "that" above refers to my entire OP, the last paragraph or some other part? — ucarr
The philosopher is opposite the gambler.
— ucarr
What does that mean? Please be clear. — Alkis Piskas
"The gambler doesn't enjoy losing. The philosopher learns to enjoy losing." — Alkis Piskas
Well, you tell me. I'm a computer programmer! :smile:We're not computers that have issues like not understanding IF x > 9 TEHN print "Hello world" — Agent Smith
Philosophers need to say something else. :heart: — Agent Smith
I try to be original, but oftentimes I find myself dealing in the currency of cliche nonetheless.:roll: — ucarr
Well, you tell me. I'm a computer programmer! :smile:
But, don't we have similar conditions in philosophy, appearing as logical schemes? Can they work if statements, arguments and propositions are not stated clearly and correctly? — Alkis Piskas
One of the seemingly silliest goals ever set by a scientist, the quest for a unified field theory of everything...
— ucarr
Ah, silly you say? The quest for great knowledge is futile to some, but intellectuality, methodology, precise accuracy, these are the measures of science. — chiknsld
was Einstein a victim of his own intellectuality? — chiknsld
The gambler plays to win.
— ucarr
Onnthe contrary, gamblers, like lovers, play to lose – to keep the games going. The action is everything, that's the jones! :broken: — 180 Proof
While losing,the philosopherlearns to enjoy it
The philosopher lives beyond "winning and losing". Amor fati. :fire: — 180 Proof
Isn't asymmetry how the Big Bang got triggered? — ucarr
Wait a minute! What if some audacious philosopher, knowing ultimate laws of everything must paradoxically fail, intentionally sets about attacking the quest for a theory of everything, being fatally curious about the nuggets that shower forth from this Hadron Super-Collider of a theory? — ucarr
It was a correction, not a criticsim. But if you like this word, you can consider my remarks as "constructive" criticism. :smile:You got me with this piercing criticism, — ucarr
You got me clueless! :smile:Isn't asymmetry how the Big Bang got triggered? — ucarr
Right.the gambler strives to beat the odds by slipping the laws of averages — ucarr
:smile:We have to fill in the gaps, principle of charity; Trolls, a different tale. — Agent Smith
Onnthe contrary, gamblers, like lovers, play to lose – to keep the games going. Theactionerection is everything, that's the jones! — 180 Proof
The richness of Relativity extended far beyond Einstein's credence — ucarr
Another typical example how a man's reach must extend his overbite. — god must be atheist
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.