Ever got into the chain of philosophical questions where you’ve reached a deduction that life actually doesn’t matter?
Yes, I am also a believer that not a single one of us truly matters.
Pessimistic it might seems, I often like to look at it with a different angle.
There shall be no true competition if no one’s winning. The society’s norm is merely a temporal hallucination. There’re only survival rules but no golden path to success. When nothing truly matters, we define our own terms of success.
Contradictory enough, I’ve found motivation through this pessimistic deduction as I alter my perspective.
I now live a life where I do what I’m passionated with regardless of the societal norm. Never cease to elevate, explore and create meaning in this fundamentally pointless life.
How beautiful it is to live in such paradox?
📷: @kurtachio1
define paradox 在 翻譯這檔事 Facebook 的精選貼文
洪蘭的黑白譯
看到紫煙亭有趣的文章,【是不是覺得自己除了「吃屎」什麼都不會?】(連結見留言),講 Tarski 的 theory of truth,想到一位老朋友。
包括「翻譯大師」洪蘭在內的許多翻譯,跟網路上流竄的各種 misinformation 和 disinformation 一樣,尤其在選舉前,請明辨真僞虛實。
如圖,看到亮點了嗎?至少三大亮點,一個標出,兩個請自尋。
The Science of Words 《詞的學問》
George A. Miller 著
洪蘭譯
// Logic introduces questions of truth, and truth is no easier to define than meaning is. In 1931 the Polish logician Alfred Tarski (1902-1983) read a paper on the concept of truth before the Warsaw Scientific Society. Tarski claimed that a formally correct definition of “true sentence” depends in an essential way on the particular language under consideration. He proposed a definition for such formalized languages as logic or mathematics, but concluded that natural language, by its very nature, does not permit a consistent use of the expression “true sentence.” Tarski phrased the traditional correspondence theory of truth in the general form: “It is snowing” is a true sentence if and only if it is snowing, then showed how it leads to the Liar’s Paradox: “This is a false sentence” is a true sentence if and only if it is a false sentence.
邏輯討論的是真偽問題,但是真實並不一定比意義更容易定義。一九三一年,波蘭邏輯學家塔斯基(Alfred Tarski, 1902-1983) 在華沙科學協會中宣讀了一篇論文,他認為真實句子(true sentence)形式上的正確定義要依據這個句子的語言而定。他提出用邏輯或數學作為形式語言的定義,但也承認自然語言,因為它的特性允許「真實句子」的表達方式。他用一般的形式來解釋傳統的真實一致理論(correspondent theory of truth): It is snowing 是真的句子,只有真正在下雪時才為真。因此,說謊者的兩難:「This is a false sentence」是真的,假如它是一個假的句子(If and only if it is a false sentence ) 。//
define paradox 在 What is PARADOX? What does PARADOX mean ... - YouTube 的必吃
... <看更多>