Interpretational Impasse Resolution

Interpretational impasse resolution

When an agreement is made based on different views of the same statement, because said statement can be interpreted both ways. This statement often contains sophistry or rhetoric, and is entirely objective.

This usually doesn’t actually solve the problem of having different beliefs, but it does solve the problem of fighting about it unnecessarily.

A: “Religion is important for morals”
B: “Religion is not needed for morals”
C: “Religion supplies morals to those with a need for guidance”
A agrees because: “Everyone needs moral guidance”
B agrees because: “People who rely on religion for moral guidance need it”


Logical Writing

Writing logically

Writing logically basically involves writing in a manner in which there is no other way of perceiving the written thing.

For example:

“There is no way to go faster than the speed of light.” 

In this sentence there is more than one possible meaning. The person could be talking entirely in the literal sense that it is simply impossible in the universe no matter the means, to travel at a speed greater than the speed of light, or they might instead mean that there is currently no means by which a person might travel faster than light, but that it may be that it is still unknown whether or not this is possible.

Writing logically as a concept eliminates this possibility for secondary or multiple meanings. Writing logically the statement might be something like the following:

 “Travelling faster than the speed of light is currently not plausible with humanity’s present technology.”

Logic Definition of Ethics

Logic definition of ethics

Ethics is based on a person’s actions and how it positively or negatively affects the person performing the action and the people affected by that action. Empathy is considered as the base of ethical conduct, as it is able to be applied consistently across individuals through autonomy; the wishes (freedom) of the people involved is therefore considered.

Ultimately freedom is the main thing that is attempted to be maintained in ethical practice.

Freedom is when a person is under no hindrance or control in terms of their intentions or will.

Acting ethically will therefore be to act without causing the freedom lost in others to outweigh the freedom you are exercising in order to perform that action.

Also, because the only way to know something is ethical or unethical is to have the physical representation of memory in the brain that suggests so, this is also taken into account. If an ethics system is isolated, there is no ethical value assigned to any action because no-one knows about it. Some examples:

Two people who are unknown by anyone else (no-one is expecting to see them, or has any wishes for them) are somewhere no person can observe them. One murders the other. In this case, while it is likely immoral that the murderer did what they did, there is no ethical value to be assigned as ethics is based on the effects of actions. Morality is the value an individual places on what memories of events they have. Ethics is the same, where the value is established systematically and the effects of the actions on all involved are considered.

In other words:

Acting ethically is to act without causing (memories of) freedom lost in others to outweigh the freedom you are (perceived to be) exercising in order to perform that action.

In practice:

Murder therefore is unethical as the person’s freedom to kill the person is not as great as the other person’s freedom to remain living, and the will of others for them to remain living.

Complete destruction of the human race is unethical only until there are no more people able to remember the events that make it unethical.

The murder of someone who has no links to any other person is not ethical, but is not assigned the ‘unethical’ tag either, as it is a matter of morality after they are gone.

Definition of something by itself

It is inaccurate or impossible to define something by itself.

The idea

It is not accurate to define something or quantify it without other sources. For example defining the word five by saying its value is 5.

This means that when defining the universe (such as the beginning of time) by using logic contained by the universe, there is no way of telling if that is correct or not. This is because the universe governs logic.

口Needs Logic and further explanation.


Last modified 2015-03-10.

Private Use

You may use this and/or share it with absolutely anyone if the interaction is regarded private. You may do absolutely anything with it in this case, no matter what it is, regardless of the rest of this page.


You may redistribute this in any way you see fit, in accordance to the CC-BY license.

Commercial Use

You may profit from the information held in this site, but preferably only if it has been heavily modified. In accordance with a CC-BY license, you must provide attribution.

Number theories

There are several different ideas surrounding logic in mathematics.
Here are some of them.

Single Number Logic

This basically states that a thing can only have one answer. For example |x|=2 would normally have two answers, 2 and -2. This theory states that a thing can only be one other thing at one time, as the physical space it takes up wherever it is is not identical to the other answer’s space / position.
Basically this follows the logic that while |x|=2 gives positive and negative 2, positive 2 and negative 2 are not the same, thus cannot fit into the same category (x). X can be -2 or it can be 2, but it cannot be both.

Multiple Number Logic

This ideology states that something will always have many answers. For example x=1. x is 1 and 2-1 and 3-2 and 1/2 + 1/2 infinitely adding combinations. The idea is that 4+4 is not exactly the same as 2+6 simply due to the fact that, as with the above, they have different data, x+y =/= y+x due to its point in time and space, thus they are different answers. This only works in logic, not mathematics due to the fact that all possible operations are completed before the answer is given.

Mathematical or “Simultaneous” Logic

This is base mathematical logic, combining the above ideas. Something can be two things, yet it can only be those two things. |x|=2 gives 2 and -2 but not 2-4 or 1+1. Data has no unique position in time/space as such, instead it is seen ‘when needed’, as if it is dynamic in logic. There is no broad frame of reference as in Multiple Number Logic.

Beginning of Time

There is no beginning to the universe, only constant existence with no start or end point.

Previous Argument

Some have said, (the evident majority) that time at one stage, started. The logic that follows is that anything that exists has been formed in some way in the past.

Present Argument

Humans can only imagine that which either lies in their memory or in genetics. Logic is something contained in memory (seen from the existence surrounding the person and from human base traits). Thus an understanding of something “always” existing is impossible to humans, and can only be labeled as infinite or other.

Reason one.
For something to exist it has to come from something else: there is no creation in the universe but rather modification.
This is a rather weak statement in logic, but as observed and by meta we can determine that it is very unlikely that it is untrue.

Reason two.
Something such as a “beginning” relies on relativity – time. Thus a beginning of time can’t exist as the method for beginnings to exist relies upon time.
“The ball in the box created it when the box contained it” as a metaphor to explain it badly.

Thus something starting without time is impossible, thus time being “started” is also impossible as it would require time.