BaalChatzaf Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Riddle of the Day: Is the hole of a doughnut something or nothing? If it is something, what is it, what is its nature, what it is made of? If it is nothing, how can be speak of it and even point to it?Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 A top down question?Heh.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I just ate fifty to start my day. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 I just ate fifty to start my day. --BrantYou ate the anti-holes.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Hougen Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 (edited) Riddle of the Day: Is the hole of a doughnut something or nothing? If it is something, what is it, what is its nature, what it is made of? If it is nothing, how can be speak of it and even point to it?A doughnut hole is a feature of a doughnut. It exists as a feature of a doughnut.Darrell Edited December 13, 2008 by Darrell Hougen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradbradallen Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 Riddle of the Day: Is the hole of a doughnut something or nothing? If it is something, what is it, what is its nature, what it is made of? If it is nothing, how can be speak of it and even point to it?Ba'al ChatzafA doughnut hole does in fact exist. While there is no physical body between the inner ring of the doughnut, the "hole" is simply a name given to reference the space that exists specifically between the upper and lower plane of the doughnut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfonso Jones Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 I just ate fifty to start my day. --BrantFilling, Brant?Bill P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfonso Jones Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 Riddle of the Day: Is the hole of a doughnut something or nothing? If it is something, what is it, what is its nature, what it is made of? If it is nothing, how can be speak of it and even point to it?Ba'al ChatzafBill P groans thinking about having to endure another discussion about the meaninglessness of "space."Objectivists don't fare very well in the field of physics.Bill P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted April 5, 2009 Author Share Posted April 5, 2009 Bill P groans thinking about having to endure another discussion about the meaninglessness of "space."Objectivists don't fare very well in the field of physics.Bill PAh! You noticed! The best they can produce is Louis Little and his crackpot theory of elementary waves. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kat Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 I'm hungry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonrobt Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 Riddle of the Day: Is the hole of a doughnut something or nothing? If it is something, what is it, what is its nature, what it is made of? If it is nothing, how can be speak of it and even point to it?Ba'al ChatzafAs a retired baker, I can attest that doughnut holes do indeed exist - they are the by-product of making doughnuts... its nature is of the same material as the doughnut... the hole in the doughnut, however, is not the same as the doughnut hole... its nature is that of consequence - the removal of the doughnut hole... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradbradallen Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 Riddle of the Day: Is the hole of a doughnut something or nothing? If it is something, what is it, what is its nature, what it is made of? If it is nothing, how can be speak of it and even point to it?Ba'al ChatzafAs a retired baker, I can attest that doughnut holes do indeed exist - they are the by-product of making doughnuts... its nature is of the same material as the doughnut... the hole in the doughnut, however, is not the same as the doughnut hole... its nature is that of consequence - the removal of the doughnut hole... Think, then, about this:When one consumes the doughnut, does the doughnut hole still exist? Seeing as the doughnut can very well be the name of the space within the planes of the doughnut, is there thousands of doughnut holes roaming the universe, lacking a doughnut to give them a distinguishing factor between themselves and the other misc. "space" that exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 Brad,The doughnut hole is part of its shape. It does not exist separately from the doughnut. As for the concept of doughnut with a hole, which is different than the concept of doughnut without a hole (although they both go by the same word), can you imagine a doughnut with a hole that does not have a hole?Can such a doughnut exist? If not, why do you think it reasonable to ask if the hole can exist separately from the "doughnut with a hole"?A concept and a word are different things. Your seeming contradiction replaces one with the other.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradbradallen Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 Brad,The doughnut hole is part of its shape. It does not exist separately from the doughnut. As for the concept of doughnut with a hole, which is different than the concept of doughnut without a hole (although they both go by the same word), can you imagine a doughnut with a hole that does not have a hole?Can such a doughnut exist? If not, why do you think it reasonable to ask if the hole can exist separately from the "doughnut with a hole"?A concept and a word are different things. Your seeming contradiction replaces one with the other.MichaelFirst off, I believe the doughnut and the doughnut hole are two separate entities, granted one is identified by the absence of the other (Doughnut hole is identified by the absence of the dough within the plane of the doughnut). The hole is simply a name given to the space of which the doughnut does not occupy. And to answer your question, such a doughnut cannot exist. It is a physical impossibility for a doughnut to both have and not have a hole. But it is reasonable to both ask and believe that the hole can exist separately from the doughnut based on my above argument that the hole is a name given to a specific area of space not occupied by the doughnut, and, seeing as the space will exist regardless of the presence of a doughnut to define it, the hole is a separate entity that merely lacks definition without the physical doughnut.But, then, I suppose the question remains: Can one define a select section of space by an object that encases it within the plane of the object? If yes, then can the space still retain its defined name (i.e. "hole" of the doughnut) if the object that defines it ceases to either exist or retain a shape itself that can define the space? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 Hmmm.If a dozen doughnuts and a dozen doughnut holes are eaten in the forest by a solitary individual who is not a cop,does the local police officer get fatter?Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kat Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 which came first... the doughnut or the hole? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonrobt Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 which came first... the doughnut or the hole?the egg - and the doughnut was made from the hole thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 the egg - and the doughnut was made from the hole thing... Awesome quote! Rand would say the dougnut hole does not exist according to Objectivist Epistemology.Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 This has gone on far enough. Time for my superior brainpower: Donuts do not have "holes." If they did when you ate a donut the hole would still be there. Wholes do not exist!--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfonso Jones Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 This has gone on far enough. Time for my superior brainpower: Donuts do not have "holes." If they did when you ate a donut the hole would still be there. Wholes do not exist!--BrantI suspect this thread is suffering from too many in-jokes. I wonder if those not familiar with where Peikoff and Harriman have headed in their thinking about physics may find the thread opaque.Bill P (too tired at the moment to try to lay things out, but I may try later...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbeaulieu Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 My head hurts now.Thanks!~ Shane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 First off, I believe the doughnut and the doughnut hole are two separate entities...Brad,This is incorrect. In philosophy an entity is an existent with a distinct existence as a whole. For instance a color is an existent, but not an entity since it is always part of something else (an entity). The doughnut's hole fits this category (shape of the entity).Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psychoanaleesis Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 (edited) The hole is actually points or shape of the to the doughnut or the fried through that surrounds it. Because of the doughnut, we can see the hole i.e. because something exist, we see its contrast. "Fugure-Ground" law of gestalt. However, even without the supposed hole, the doughnut is still a doughnut but the hole, without the doughnut is nothing. Edited February 27, 2010 by David Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psychoanaleesis Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 (edited) Oh, damn, I wanted to edit my last post because of too much editing, it doesn't make sense now...1st sentence should actually be: The hole is actually a point of reference to the doughnut or, more specifically - the dough that surrounds it Edited February 27, 2010 by David Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RightJungle Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 (edited) First off, I believe the doughnut and the doughnut hole are two separate entities...Brad,This is incorrect. In philosophy an entity is an existent with a distinct existence as a whole. For instance a color is an existent, but not an entity since it is always part of something else (an entity). The doughnut's hole fits this category (shape of the entity).MichaelMichael, would Rand say that the donut hole is the abstraction of an abstraction that is derived from our perception of the shape of the donut? Mary Lee Edited February 28, 2010 by Mary Lee Harsha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now