Talk:Meta Probability Manipulation/@comment-31057336-20170705173812/@comment-30766268-20170706100840

allow me to put it that way:

from the way I see it, our main arguemnat (that's at least what I think we argue about) is if 'pataphysics is rational or not, and if it's have a probability. I say it doesn't as by definition 'pataphysics is science of imaginery solutions and irationality. it's doesn't nesseserly works on the usual; cause and effect system, and have no logic, unless you want to apply logic on it.

'pataphysics is a joke, invented by a writter in france 150 years ago, or something like that.

it's not meant to be taken seriusly, and it doesn't suppose to make any sense.

that's why I say.

DYBAD, from what I was able to understand so far, does not agree with me, and say probability apply, and everything have cause and effect.

If you want to say MPM can achive useing probability things which are possible through 'pataphysics, you are right, and wrong. true, some of them it can achive, but here is the problem:

LimitationsEdit

 * Cannot induce results that are absolutely impossible.

the very first limitation of MPM is that it can't do the immposible.

on the other hand, 'pataphysics is exactly about doing immposible things which makes no sense at all and are basically paradox, and as exchange to metaphysics, which solve them useing logic which is simply diferent then out logic, 'pataphysics solve them because it solve them. there is no reason for why.

physocs would say that a rocl you would throw would fall down to the earth because of gravity, adn stuff like that.

metaphysics would explain you that it's happened because of somethng else, which is not nesseserly gravity, be it a divine interfirence, or some other law of reality which we simply don't know about.

'pataphysics won't explain that. it would jsut say it's happened, or, when asked why, her respond would most likely be "because fuck Newton!".

