🧡⭐🔥☀️

yeah yeah elaine Christian majority is not theologically consistent, very very observant, good job

it feels weird knowing the mental contortion needed to square divorce with Christianity is much worse than the one for queerness, but nobody _really_ cares about the former as much as they do the latter. or maybe im just frustrated because i'm on the side that has no majority community or support

"Drink ye all of this; for this is my Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you, and for many, for the remission of sins. Do this, as oft as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me."

although it is much easier to listen to music than pray 😅

The only times I've felt euphoria, like, genuine actual euphoria, is either through music, or through prayer.

music <3

def more on the "math" side of logic but at least those first two chapters on PL and FOL are good as rigorous references to any philosophical logic course

hell yeah

bloomfie, can i send u a good intro textbook on mathematical logic i plan to go through? it covers propositional logic, first-order logic, specific first-order theories (arithmetic, set theory), and then a little bit of computability theory

I feel like a really catchy chorus, or really pleasing melodies can really make a track in a lot of cases, but I also just enjoy instrumentation that prioritizes rhythm above all else, in a different way.

And of course, house and salsa are very different in a lot of ways, but both are meant to be danced to, and I think I just enjoy music like that in a very different way than when I listen to rock, ska-punk, or jazz.

I suppose this is a component of a lot of dance music, too. I'm noticing that Reaggaeton is very similar, although the lyrics there do tend to being more important, inspired by hip hop. But that's because a lot of Latin music is just, also dance music, at it's core. Very rhythmic.

My enjoyment of electronic music is so different from when I listen to other forms of music, especially if it's more adjacent to House. I love the repetitive rhythm, drum patterns, vocals that are intended to "sound good" more than anything else... it's nice.

this offer never expires btw. i get this every time i open this stupid thing

This app is such a fucking scam. look at the Close button

I think, both of them individually seek to maximally exercise the greatest commandment, to love God with all your heart, body, mind, and soul; and to love your neighbor as yourself... They are both very laudable. I very much admire both...

Franciscans and Carmelites are so cool

seriously considering what Christianity is, and what the truths of the Gospel are

just bought a PC c:

probably overspent on the GPU but hopefully i can do lots of cool little machine learning experiments, so i don't mind

most annoying occurrence ever is that sms otps just do not fucking work like 50% of the time with my PR phone number

I am so ridiculously bad at geometry

a simple geometry problem in my topology textbook is hurting my brain AAAAAAA

i think you're right

ah, natural law, classic....

so, it's really a problem of modelling. using modal logic is sort of inherently hard, because you have to be able to defend your use of modalities on the one hand, and your disuse of FOL on the other!

So, if you are already using FOL in any way, modalities are just syntax at best. Of course, the utility of restricted, properly _modal_ languages is non-negligible, since then you get certain benefits, both formal (computional complexity, decideability) and otherwise (simpler, sometimes sufficient)

On that modality point, you're 100% correct. And also, there's a very solid argument to be made that, for philosophers in particular, modal logic is a bit redundant. At the very least, you can embed any* modality defined w.r.t. a propositional logic L, in a first-order logic over L.

yup!

I think classical logics are fantastic as meta-languages, unless you are a hardcore constructivist. At the very least, being able to non-constructively prove that a statement is provable constructively, yet more easily prove it non-constructively, then, whatever? That's completely fine to me

But I think that mathematics has poised itself to be very much, almost in the whole, concerned with these kinds of dichotomous true/false propositions... We suffer no loss of generality in modelling phenomena via formal theories this way, except a _pratical_ mechanization concern...

if you need the computational correspondences afforded by constructive formal systems, or you want to consider a domain via a logic (perhaps epistemological) that is inherently many-valued, or for some other reason the LEM doesn't hold (very conceivable), then sure. Drop it. Why not?