GENOMNI and other things.

Can you convince me that my statement is incorrect?

"I am always right."

Remember 'CAN' means 'WILL", if you can't, you won't.

If you claim you can do something and don't, during all time available. It means you never could, whether you were stopped by such things as fear, ability, desire, ignorance, lack of opportunity or barriers of any kind (whether labeled as physical or mental).

You can't even KNOW the statement to be false. To KNOW the statement to be false would require PROOF, and all you may have is EVIDENCE of any previous actions I may have made. (actions including statements I may have made.)

There is a new language, it is called PerfectLinguistIcExpression.01 - PLE.01

PLE.01 is similar to English but does not contain the words;

Opinion
Fact
Truth
Knowledge
Belief
Guess
Evidence
Proof
Convince
Theory
Hypothesis
Experience
Subjective
Objective

or variations upon.

A statement in PLE.01 may seem to be contradicted by other statements in PLE.01 made at other times.

A mixture of PLE.01 and other languages may be used.

(C) Copyright by Mark Gilbert 2008

Experience is always subjective.

Experience is always empirical. I use a 'sense' to perceive that I am thinking. Without a sense (form of observation), I would not be able to observe my thinking.

I have only ever experienced subjectivity and so I find the word redundant, as it is implied in my every statement.

I will try not to use the term empirical, for the same reasons.

I only have experience of my experience, so I do not believe in any other experience than my own. (occam's razor)

I will try to avoid the use of 'my experience' and just use 'experience'.

In experience, I find entities that appear to exhibit intelligent behavior (learning).

The only thinking I am aware of is my thinking. So I will try to use "thinking" in replacement of "my thinking.

I may stop using the word 'I' as 'I' implies there is something other than my experience.

To refer to belief is redundant, as all communication relies on belief.

All of this relies on me breaking bad habits.

(C) Copyright by Mark Gilbert 2008.

The Cartesian claim - I think, therefor I am. Is not, in my opinion, as elegant as my claim;

"I experience, therefor I am." which is equivalent to my claim that "I am my experience." which is equivalent to my claim "I am that which I experience."

I can not deny that I experience, nor can I deny that thinking is part of my experience.

What I experience is experience itself.

All information has meaning. perceived entropy of information does not show lack of meaning.

I believe the following hypothesis. but I do not believe it to be true.

You can not believe things to be true, truth can not rely on belief.

My current subjective experience is not belief, it is truth by semantic definition. Can that truth be communicated, I hypothesise not. Now the only way I can see you could come to the same conclusion is by empirical observation of your own. Presuming you have empirical observation and subjective experience.

My hypothesis appears to me to rely on first order logic, I can not claim that to be true, but if you rely on a different logic (that maybe equally as valid, less valid or more so.) then this may not make sense to you.

I believe first order logic to be the only method that allows for easy analysis and communication of philosophical ideas. That is not a statement of truth but a statement of belief.

You are even welcome to have a different semantic definition of truth than "current subjective experience.", But I would not claim truth of anything that relies on presumptions, except by shared semantic definition.

I just do not claim truth.

The end of this hypothesis.