I just had an eventful couple of days. Last night, I got some hardware for my computer, a new video card and secondary hard drive. Before installing, I needed to wipe the old video card drivers first. However, I fucked up and wiped all of the video drivers from xorg. Thankfully, I had just backed up everything in preparation for a new harddrive, so doing a reinstall wasn't a big deal. It just took a couple of hours. Of course, once I realized the drivers had been wiped, I just powered the system down and installed the new hardware so that the install could go through with the new stuff in. Got that done, and everything working like it should now. I still have to set my PDA up again, but that's not a big deal.
Since I now have a better video card, I was also able to get Beryl working, so I have more eye candy now. It slows my computer down, but looks cool. It's also easy to turn off, so not a big deal for when I want to run a more high-memory program. For my normal usage, I don't need much at all.
Today, I gave a talk on dialetheism, the belief that there are at least some true contradictions. I haven't given any kind of presentation in a while, and I wasn't as familiar with this material, so it got off to a rough start, but it generated enough discussion to go on for a while, and I got more comfortable as I went. I've been wrestling with the topic all week because I have an intuitive bias against the sort of metaphysics proposed in a consistentist system, but actually generating a paraconsistent logic means giving up lots of classical logic. I'm not entirely against that in principle, but given that classical logic seems to work well enough, I don't know that we have reason enough to switch to another system entirely, as long as we remember the limits of classical logic. If I were to endorse an alternate system, it would be one by Lukasiewicz and Tarski which defines truth as a continuum from 0 (perfectly false) to 1 (perfectly true). Most of classical logic is maintained, so one isn't building things from the ground up as much. Thankfully, I'm not a logician, so I don't have to seriously worry about such things.
I feel bad about not being able to keep up with the game, but I need to be more on top of my reading this semester, and I have a shorter continuous weekend. If we go too stir crazy, we'll try to work it out.
Since I now have a better video card, I was also able to get Beryl working, so I have more eye candy now. It slows my computer down, but looks cool. It's also easy to turn off, so not a big deal for when I want to run a more high-memory program. For my normal usage, I don't need much at all.
Today, I gave a talk on dialetheism, the belief that there are at least some true contradictions. I haven't given any kind of presentation in a while, and I wasn't as familiar with this material, so it got off to a rough start, but it generated enough discussion to go on for a while, and I got more comfortable as I went. I've been wrestling with the topic all week because I have an intuitive bias against the sort of metaphysics proposed in a consistentist system, but actually generating a paraconsistent logic means giving up lots of classical logic. I'm not entirely against that in principle, but given that classical logic seems to work well enough, I don't know that we have reason enough to switch to another system entirely, as long as we remember the limits of classical logic. If I were to endorse an alternate system, it would be one by Lukasiewicz and Tarski which defines truth as a continuum from 0 (perfectly false) to 1 (perfectly true). Most of classical logic is maintained, so one isn't building things from the ground up as much. Thankfully, I'm not a logician, so I don't have to seriously worry about such things.
I feel bad about not being able to keep up with the game, but I need to be more on top of my reading this semester, and I have a shorter continuous weekend. If we go too stir crazy, we'll try to work it out.
verse:
I find you very intriguing. Thanks for the sweet comment on my first set. 