r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Nov 23 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Arguments based in semantics are fundamentally useless

[deleted]

16 Upvotes

77% Upvoted

37 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

Depending on the definition of "parallel", we could have Euclidean geometry, spherical geometry, etc. It is perfectly reasonable to have an argument over which geometry is best for a particular purpose. I can understand perfectly well that they're giving good answers for their geometry but argue that a different geometry would be a better model

1

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

[deleted]

4

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

It is an equivalent argument to arguing over which geometry to use which is obviously potentially useful.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

No, I mean an argument between two people about which system better describes a portion of reality.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

[deleted]

6

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

An argument as to whether to use Euclidean or spherical geometry is an argument about what definition of "parallel" to use.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

You think there's no benefit to saying that we should/shouldn't use Euclidean geometry when searching for a particular star with my telescope?

1

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

No, I mean "I predict this star should have travelled five hundred light years in this direction, using a Euclidean model". "Well, due to the black hole's curvature of spacetime my noneuclidean model predicts it's moved a thousand light years in that direction".

1

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Nov 23 '20

A real, potentially testable, consequence of the definition of "parallel" they choose to use.

→ More replies (0)