Your statement of
2 + 2 = 4 only holds true when
there are 2 items mathematically added to 2 other items
so that there are 4 items.
I do not know any other way to add 2+2.
as I mentioned in a previous post, this truth is relative to the definition of two and of the operand +
Now, I could rewrite the equation
|2| + |2| = 2
I am not familiar with this nomenclature, but it makes no sense to me.
in digital logic, I could rewrite the statement
2 = 1 1
2 = 1 1
so the 2 + 2 = 4 is not absolute, being relative to the definition not only of 2 but also the function and definition of the operand +
I am familiar with the binary system, and in this or any other numbering system, 2+2=4 but is merely written differently.
For instance, if you write 2+2 =4 in Spanish this does not change the mathematics.
Let me put this challenge before you.
If you take two apples and add two additional apples you will get four apples. Let me challenge anyone to use the binary or any other system and cause any other sum to appear than four apples.
What I find interesting is that this reasoning is very simple to a child. It takes adults to complicate truth to the extent that it becomes as perplexing as counting rabbits running around in a fog.
Now let me redirect our thoughts back to Lawrence's questions.
1. What are three kinds of knowledge which are not intuition?
2. How are they different from intuition?
Let me ask this additional question:
Two people have the same question and receive the answer through intuition yet explain it a little differently to others. What causes this different description of the truth? Did they receive two conflicting truths or was it something else?
Copyright 2000 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved