Forum
»
This
- Results 1 to 19 of 19
-
Page 1 of 1
Thread: This
03-21-2026, 11:11 AM
-
#1
This
The fact the education system pushes you to believe the map is the territory first (teaching you math within its axiom first and not outside its axiom first) is already signs of major deception.
This alone should wake you up. If you have no clue what I’m saying copy and paste the shit into ai and it will explain. But it nearly garentees deception of your math is at play here
This alone should wake you up. If you have no clue what I’m saying copy and paste the shit into ai and it will explain. But it nearly garentees deception of your math is at play here
03-21-2026, 11:15 AM
-
#2
- N0rds
- "7'7" Norwegian chad with blonde hair blue eyes immigrant and a btc billionaire" -Tranny Maria
-
- N0rds
- "7'7" Norwegian chad with blonde hair blue eyes immigrant and a btc billionaire" -Tranny Maria
- Join Date: May 2012
- Location: AntiTranny Aktion
- Height: 6'6"
- Posts: 32,436
- Subscribers: 7
- Rep Power: 449740
-
-
Originally Posted By Gesten1⏩
The fact the education system pushes you to believe the map is the territory first (teaching you math within its axiom first and not outside its axiom first) is already signs of major deception.
This alone should wake you up. If you have no clue what I’m saying copy and paste the shit into ai and it will explain. But it nearly garentees deception of your math is at play here
This alone should wake you up. If you have no clue what I’m saying copy and paste the shit into ai and it will explain. But it nearly garentees deception of your math is at play here
"Boss not feel good please use sick day" - low IQ tranny.
"Send him to Phaggy_Cholo"
03-21-2026, 11:20 AM
-
#3
03-21-2026, 11:22 AM
-
#4
- N0rds
- "7'7" Norwegian chad with blonde hair blue eyes immigrant and a btc billionaire" -Tranny Maria
-
- N0rds
- "7'7" Norwegian chad with blonde hair blue eyes immigrant and a btc billionaire" -Tranny Maria
- Join Date: May 2012
- Location: AntiTranny Aktion
- Height: 6'6"
- Posts: 32,436
- Subscribers: 7
- Rep Power: 449740
-
-
Originally Posted By Gesten1⏩
@miscmathmatician
I want some real refuting of this. There is no refuting of this
I want some real refuting of this. There is no refuting of this
"Boss not feel good please use sick day" - low IQ tranny.
"Send him to Phaggy_Cholo"
03-21-2026, 07:29 PM
-
#6
03-21-2026, 07:31 PM
-
#7
- Mulloway69
- (;`ー´)o/￣￣￣~>°)))彡
-
- Mulloway69
- (;`ー´)o/￣￣￣~>°)))彡
- Join Date: Sep 2011
- Posts: 11,086
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 302032
-
-
I posted it into AI, this is what it had to say:
TL;DR: Time for your meds.
If someone claims the education system forces you to “believe the map is the territory,” they’re describing a straw-man version of schooling they apparently never experienced. Universities run entire courses called “Foundations of Mathematics,” “Set Theory,” “Model Theory,” and “Philosophy of Math” where students tear the axioms apart, prove independence results (e.g., the continuum hypothesis is independent of ZFC), and study Gödel’s incompleteness theorems. That’s the opposite of concealment.
The real red flagPeople who say “your math is deceived” almost always want to smuggle in their own pet “true math” (hyper-real numbers that let them deny calculus, or some flat-Earth-friendly geometry, or whatever). They reject the standard axioms not because they found a flaw, but because the conclusions don’t fit their worldview. Then they flip the Korzybski quote upside-down: instead of “don’t confuse model with reality,” they treat their preferred intuition as the sacred territory and call every formal system a conspiracy.Bottom line: the education system is imperfect (too much rote memorization, not enough history of how axioms were chosen), but the specific claim here is nonsense. Teaching math axiomatically is how we keep it honest, falsifiable, and open to revision. The loon is the one trying to sell you a different map while pretending it’s the territory.
The real red flagPeople who say “your math is deceived” almost always want to smuggle in their own pet “true math” (hyper-real numbers that let them deny calculus, or some flat-Earth-friendly geometry, or whatever). They reject the standard axioms not because they found a flaw, but because the conclusions don’t fit their worldview. Then they flip the Korzybski quote upside-down: instead of “don’t confuse model with reality,” they treat their preferred intuition as the sacred territory and call every formal system a conspiracy.Bottom line: the education system is imperfect (too much rote memorization, not enough history of how axioms were chosen), but the specific claim here is nonsense. Teaching math axiomatically is how we keep it honest, falsifiable, and open to revision. The loon is the one trying to sell you a different map while pretending it’s the territory.
03-21-2026, 08:05 PM
-
#8
Originally Posted By Gesten1⏩
Flat earther?
The fact the education system pushes you to believe the map is the territory first (teaching you math within its axiom first and not outside its axiom first) is already signs of major deception.
This alone should wake you up. If you have no clue what I’m saying copy and paste the shit into ai and it will explain. But it nearly garentees deception of your math is at play here
This alone should wake you up. If you have no clue what I’m saying copy and paste the shit into ai and it will explain. But it nearly garentees deception of your math is at play here
03-21-2026, 08:11 PM
-
#9
He’s basically making a pseudo-philosophical / conspiracy-style argument about math and education.
What he seems to mean:
“The map is not the territory” is an old idea meaning a model or description of reality is not reality itself.
He’s claiming the education system teaches people to accept a formal system of math first—its rules, axioms, symbols—without questioning whether those rules perfectly match reality.
From that, he jumps to: “therefore deception is happening.”
The problem is that this argument does not actually prove deception.
A more grounded way to put it would be:
Math is a modeling language.
Axioms are starting assumptions inside a system.
Different mathematical systems can exist.
Reality is not identical to the symbols we use to describe it.
That part is fair.
Where it goes off the rails is implying:
because math is built from axioms,
and because models are not reality,
therefore school is lying to you.
That does not follow.
Math classes teach an axiom-based framework because that is how logical systems work. It is not deception; it is just the structure of formal reasoning. You can absolutely study math “outside its axiom,” but then you are doing philosophy of math, logic, foundations, or physics.
So in plain English, his post is basically:
“School teaches you the rules of the model before teaching you to question whether the model is reality, and that should make you suspicious.”
That idea contains a tiny kernel of philosophy, but the way he says it is vague, dramatic, and unsupported.
If you want, I can also translate his post line by line into normal English.
What he seems to mean:
“The map is not the territory” is an old idea meaning a model or description of reality is not reality itself.
He’s claiming the education system teaches people to accept a formal system of math first—its rules, axioms, symbols—without questioning whether those rules perfectly match reality.
From that, he jumps to: “therefore deception is happening.”
The problem is that this argument does not actually prove deception.
A more grounded way to put it would be:
Math is a modeling language.
Axioms are starting assumptions inside a system.
Different mathematical systems can exist.
Reality is not identical to the symbols we use to describe it.
That part is fair.
Where it goes off the rails is implying:
because math is built from axioms,
and because models are not reality,
therefore school is lying to you.
That does not follow.
Math classes teach an axiom-based framework because that is how logical systems work. It is not deception; it is just the structure of formal reasoning. You can absolutely study math “outside its axiom,” but then you are doing philosophy of math, logic, foundations, or physics.
So in plain English, his post is basically:
“School teaches you the rules of the model before teaching you to question whether the model is reality, and that should make you suspicious.”
That idea contains a tiny kernel of philosophy, but the way he says it is vague, dramatic, and unsupported.
If you want, I can also translate his post line by line into normal English.
03-21-2026, 08:17 PM
-
#10
Originally Posted By boygirl⏩
What I hated about some math classes was how they fukkin expected you to re-invent the theorems and figure out for yourself why they’re right. I’m guessing op didn’t take challenging math classes.
He’s basically making a pseudo-philosophical / conspiracy-style argument about math and education.
What he seems to mean:
“The map is not the territory” is an old idea meaning a model or description of reality is not reality itself.
He’s claiming the education system teaches people to accept a formal system of math first—its rules, axioms, symbols—without questioning whether those rules perfectly match reality.
From that, he jumps to: “therefore deception is happening.”
The problem is that this argument does not actually prove deception.
A more grounded way to put it would be:
Math is a modeling language.
Axioms are starting assumptions inside a system.
Different mathematical systems can exist.
Reality is not identical to the symbols we use to describe it.
That part is fair.
Where it goes off the rails is implying:
because math is built from axioms,
and because models are not reality,
therefore school is lying to you.
That does not follow.
Math classes teach an axiom-based framework because that is how logical systems work. It is not deception; it is just the structure of formal reasoning. You can absolutely study math “outside its axiom,” but then you are doing philosophy of math, logic, foundations, or physics.
So in plain English, his post is basically:
“School teaches you the rules of the model before teaching you to question whether the model is reality, and that should make you suspicious.”
That idea contains a tiny kernel of philosophy, but the way he says it is vague, dramatic, and unsupported.
If you want, I can also translate his post line by line into normal English.
What he seems to mean:
“The map is not the territory” is an old idea meaning a model or description of reality is not reality itself.
He’s claiming the education system teaches people to accept a formal system of math first—its rules, axioms, symbols—without questioning whether those rules perfectly match reality.
From that, he jumps to: “therefore deception is happening.”
The problem is that this argument does not actually prove deception.
A more grounded way to put it would be:
Math is a modeling language.
Axioms are starting assumptions inside a system.
Different mathematical systems can exist.
Reality is not identical to the symbols we use to describe it.
That part is fair.
Where it goes off the rails is implying:
because math is built from axioms,
and because models are not reality,
therefore school is lying to you.
That does not follow.
Math classes teach an axiom-based framework because that is how logical systems work. It is not deception; it is just the structure of formal reasoning. You can absolutely study math “outside its axiom,” but then you are doing philosophy of math, logic, foundations, or physics.
So in plain English, his post is basically:
“School teaches you the rules of the model before teaching you to question whether the model is reality, and that should make you suspicious.”
That idea contains a tiny kernel of philosophy, but the way he says it is vague, dramatic, and unsupported.
If you want, I can also translate his post line by line into normal English.
03-22-2026, 07:23 PM
-
#11
Originally Posted By boygirl⏩
Keep feeding it to different ais. 80% support it and even call it deception
He’s basically making a pseudo-philosophical / conspiracy-style argument about math and education.
What he seems to mean:
“The map is not the territory” is an old idea meaning a model or description of reality is not reality itself.
He’s claiming the education system teaches people to accept a formal system of math first—its rules, axioms, symbols—without questioning whether those rules perfectly match reality.
From that, he jumps to: “therefore deception is happening.”
The problem is that this argument does not actually prove deception.
A more grounded way to put it would be:
Math is a modeling language.
Axioms are starting assumptions inside a system.
Different mathematical systems can exist.
Reality is not identical to the symbols we use to describe it.
That part is fair.
Where it goes off the rails is implying:
because math is built from axioms,
and because models are not reality,
therefore school is lying to you.
That does not follow.
Math classes teach an axiom-based framework because that is how logical systems work. It is not deception; it is just the structure of formal reasoning. You can absolutely study math “outside its axiom,” but then you are doing philosophy of math, logic, foundations, or physics.
So in plain English, his post is basically:
“School teaches you the rules of the model before teaching you to question whether the model is reality, and that should make you suspicious.”
That idea contains a tiny kernel of philosophy, but the way he says it is vague, dramatic, and unsupported.
If you want, I can also translate his post line by line into normal English.
What he seems to mean:
“The map is not the territory” is an old idea meaning a model or description of reality is not reality itself.
He’s claiming the education system teaches people to accept a formal system of math first—its rules, axioms, symbols—without questioning whether those rules perfectly match reality.
From that, he jumps to: “therefore deception is happening.”
The problem is that this argument does not actually prove deception.
A more grounded way to put it would be:
Math is a modeling language.
Axioms are starting assumptions inside a system.
Different mathematical systems can exist.
Reality is not identical to the symbols we use to describe it.
That part is fair.
Where it goes off the rails is implying:
because math is built from axioms,
and because models are not reality,
therefore school is lying to you.
That does not follow.
Math classes teach an axiom-based framework because that is how logical systems work. It is not deception; it is just the structure of formal reasoning. You can absolutely study math “outside its axiom,” but then you are doing philosophy of math, logic, foundations, or physics.
So in plain English, his post is basically:
“School teaches you the rules of the model before teaching you to question whether the model is reality, and that should make you suspicious.”
That idea contains a tiny kernel of philosophy, but the way he says it is vague, dramatic, and unsupported.
If you want, I can also translate his post line by line into normal English.
you should first learn about the territory(meta cognition, what a map is etc) not the subjective map
otherwise youre straight up brainwashing people
03-22-2026, 07:25 PM
-
#12
Originally Posted By MegaSloot⏩
No my guy.. I don’t believe the earth is flat
Flat earther?
Your math is wrong that’s what’s wrong
Your perception of reality is controlled
You’re living in a delusion 5,000 years in the making
1x1=1 exist no where in raw concrete reality
Groups exist no where in raw concrete reality
Math is supposed to model reality. 1x1=1 models absolutely nothing. It models fiction
03-22-2026, 07:28 PM
-
#13
Originally Posted By Mulloway69⏩
You def made a biased prompt for that prob saying something like “dismantle this lunatic words”
I posted it into AI, this is what it had to say:
TL;DR: Time for your meds.
TL;DR: Time for your meds.
Even though the ai didn’t dismantle anything lmao Just straight up word salad
03-22-2026, 07:28 PM
-
#14
- Mulloway69
- (;`ー´)o/￣￣￣~>°)))彡
-
- Mulloway69
- (;`ー´)o/￣￣￣~>°)))彡
- Join Date: Sep 2011
- Posts: 11,086
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 302032
-
-
It's not my revelation at all, but in my experience, the biggest common denominator in people with moderate or severe mental illness is...they dont believe they are mentally ill or at least fail to realise the extent of their mental illness.
03-22-2026, 07:30 PM
-
#15
Originally Posted By Mulloway69⏩
You people are the ones believing in something that doesn’t exist in raw concrete reality (1x1=1 and groups)
It's not my revelation at all, but in my experience, the biggest common denominator in people with moderate or severe mental illness is...they dont believe they are mentally ill or at least fail to realise the extent of their mental illness.
This is delusion and mental ilness at its core
03-22-2026, 07:31 PM
-
#16
03-22-2026, 07:34 PM
-
#17
Originally Posted By MegaSloot⏩
The problem is: youre first taught their subjective map first
What I hated about some math classes was how they fukkin expected you to re-invent the theorems and figure out for yourself why they’re right. I’m guessing op didn’t take challenging math classes.
When you should be first taught what the territory is and what a map is first
That’s the problem I’m saying in this post.. it’s deception at its finest. This is how you control masses
03-22-2026, 07:37 PM
-
#18
- explosiveMidget
- Always creepin never sleepin
-
- explosiveMidget
- Always creepin never sleepin
- Join Date: Mar 2014
- Location: IRELAND
- Age: 35
- Height: 5'6"
- Weight: 203 lbs
- Posts: 29,062
- Subscribers: 11
- Rep Power: 280904
-
-
03-22-2026, 07:50 PM
-
#19
- steffo99
- Join Date: Apr 2012
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Age: 51
- Height: 6'2"
- Weight: 212 lbs
- Posts: 15,370
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 629378
-
-
Originally Posted By MegaSloot⏩
Can't say I had to take challenging classes, but felt it was weird how different various classes were. Struggled a bit in algebra and got a my only C, but moving on to calculus etc that was supposed to harder - I found that very easy and got an A. Same with any subject after, like quantitative methods in business, or some finance classes in grad school where I was the only one to solve the hardest problems and even chineese students wanted to see how I did it.
I’m guessing op didn’t take challenging math classes.
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts