Ken Fabian Posted July 16, 2019 Posted July 16, 2019 Farid, are you trying to be a topologist? Anyway it is your premise that the circle gets changed into a square - and that means (and therefore proves) the circle undergoes change. It is you that keeps telling us it is changed - should I be apologising for believing you?
Farid Posted July 16, 2019 Author Posted July 16, 2019 (edited) Quote No, that person is saying the circle transformed into a square, not that the circle it is equivalent to a square. I know that person is saying it transformed. If someone says that a circle became a square, he is saying that a circle is a square or a circle is the same as a square. So you are saying that a circle cannot be a square or a circle is not the same as a square, therefore a circle always remains a circle. Quote Anyway it is your premise that the circle gets changed into a square - and that means (and therefore proves) the circle undergoes change. It is you that keeps telling us it is changed - should I be apologising for believing you? Try to ignore that change is happening. Try just focusing on understanding what I am saying. I was not saying that a change is happening, I was saying suppose someone else does. Edited July 16, 2019 by Farid -2
swansont Posted July 16, 2019 Posted July 16, 2019 ! Moderator Note Since this just seems to be arguing semantics, going in circles, and is indistinguishable from trolling: closed
Recommended Posts