Comment on Strawberries are nuts đ
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone â¨3⊠â¨weeks⊠agoNeither of the two constructions you listed would result in a periodic table.
I⌠didnât say that they would? If you change the map, itâs obviously a different map. Youâd call it âMetallicaâs table of metals,â or something.
So your telling me that I need to be cautious of you derailing the conversation away from itâs original premise?
No⌠I just donât think you realize how anti-intellectual youâre being.
iâll be keeping you to the premise and the periodic table for this discussion. It need not go further.
Okay, dad. But, you were the one who brought up fascists.
Very rude, by the way.
Uh, to anyone reading, I guess: Look up Jordan Petersonâs wikipedia. He is not a fan of whatever his meat-addled brain thinks Post Modernism is.
If the ordering of the periodic table were arbitrary, it couldnât be a periodic table.
It is arbitrarily a periodic table because the periodic table has utility. That utility is why we donât arrange them a different way. This isnât complicated.
If you want an example of different motivations: Do these periods tell you how beautiful each element is? Does beauty rise in each column and row? You might need a different map for that.
In fact, the ordering even predicted languages that were not yet known to the person who developed the order.
That would be very insightful. I would say we should arbitrarily prefer that ordering because of how useful it would be to us.
Or we could arbitrarily choose not to because just the one language is good enough, innit?
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world â¨3⊠â¨weeks⊠ago
Im not being anti intellectual. I simply have no patience for frauds masquerading their metaphysics as philosophy.
In the end you canât argue the point on its merits and are just engaging in sophistry. So weâll come back to the first: you donât actually know what the periodic table of the elements is. You should stop pretending you have a point if you canât make make it.
If you donât understand the difference between metaphysics and philosophy, its probably best you did neither.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone â¨3⊠â¨weeks⊠ago
Aw, donât be a sore loser.
I canât engage with your point on its merits because itâs not relevant to the argument that Iâm makingâitâs a complete non-sequitur.
You want me to prove that the periodic table doesnât predict undiscovered elements? What does that have to do with where people direct their effort and attention?
This is why the tomato fruit/vegetable example is so useful: itâs about what facts are useful to whom. It actually has nothing to do with the periodic table at all, that just happens to be a particularly prickly thorn for stem majors.
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world â¨3⊠â¨weeks⊠ago
You are delusional if you think you âwonâ anything.
The only thing you did was demonstrate that you are a vapid waste of time.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone â¨3⊠â¨weeks⊠ago
Christ, my man, do you need a time out? Are you late for a nap or something?
I promise you thereâs nothing at stake here; Iâm not âdismantlingâ chemistry. I agree itâs useful, itâs good stuff. Mendeleev did a good job.