🚀 go-pugleaf

Then Brian Raab said:
>
>But it's a paradox, logic requires brain but I have none ?
>
>Help!

Ok.

Logic is independent of the observer's brain.
Therefore it would exist whether or not you have one.
Logic only exists, period. Just like you only exist, period,
if you have no brain, since you would only be a vegetable,
right? Of course with no brain your existence is
undecidable for you. If you don't exist, then logic does or does
not exist. If it's the case that logic does not exist, then the
paradox would be removed and you could have a brain. You would
not be a vegetable. But remember, corn is a starch, not a
vegetable. I know what you're thinking in your non-brain: "Aw
shucks!" Hey, this is only logic, not science. But unfortunately,
you wouldn't be if you had a brain, regardless of the length of
your brain stalk. That's certainly better than knowing for sure,
isn't it? So I've helped part way. Any more will cost you some
bread, which you unfortunately can't have in either of your two
possible states as you have defined them. You've escaped one
paradox only to find yourself in another. Try sci.physics. It's
cheaper.

MIlt