There are also only two different animals: elephants and non-elephants.
Anything unrelated to elephants is irrelephant.
This comment needs way more approval
120 is a lot.
Are these elephants in the room right now?
The elephants exist in a state of being in the room and not being in the room
You gotta address the elephant in the room for it to exist
As a non-elephant in the room I feel overlooked
There are elephants, non-elephants, and undetermined elephants.
This comment was made by the intuitionistic and/or fuzzy logic gang.
You either are crabs or have crabs
Holy crab
I think you are mistaken actually the different types of animal are frogs and not frogs
Your both wrong there are crabs and then there are crabs 🦀🦀🦀🦀
we are crab 🦀
🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀 JAGEX SERVERS ARE POWERLESS AGAINST AUTH DELAY 🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀🦀
Crabs and will eventually evolve into crab.
Crabbbbb people craaaabbb peopleeee
There are bullfrogs and elephant bulls, so we can conclude that {🐸}∩{🐘}⊂{🐂}
Frogness is a spectrum
That’s a very frogressive thing to say.
Hmm perhaps some kind of sliding scale is in order
I think you actually want {🐸}∪{🐘}⊂{🐂} because ∪ is union and ∩ is intersection. There are no frogs that are also elephants so the set would be empty and thus couldn’t contain any bulls. 😔
Aktshually, the empty set is a subset of any other set 🤓
But also, the fact that frogs and elephants are disjunct is conjecture at this point
Crabs and not yet crabs.
I am frog-fluid. Some days I am a frog and others I am not frog.
Doesn’t that happen just once, when tadpolemaxxing has been achieved ?
Fuck Aristotel
Fuck him yourself coward
If only I was a dog
I love when people say they hate Hippocrates on social media
You could’ve said that it’s Zena’s paradox
The two genders: Binary and Non-binary.
To be fair, it calls then categories, not genders
There are non-binary people who still believe genders can suit others, and even be played with as forms of role play …and there are also examples of null states, such as nullos and asexuals…
…so non-binary doesn’t necessarily make a new binary if they still believe gender is fine for others, or as a role play.
A better way to think about it might be as a gender spectrum or quadratic continuum of varied characteristics and overlapping body forms and sexual preferences/behaviour.
…queer.
Asexuality isn’t a gender. We’re just not attracted to people of any gender. Our gender identity is separate.
What up my hexadecimals
That’s just like Hangul, but for computer numbers.
Once you’re quite good at reading hexadecimals, you no longer need to look up binary, though you still need decimal-hexadecimal conversion, which is slower.
binary: {0,1}, non-binary: [0,1]
OP: {binary, non-binary}
binary ⊂ non-binary
Feel like there’s a Set Theory issue with this but I barely understand what little I can remember about it.
A bit can have two states:
trueorfalse. Additionally, the bit can be disabled altogether (null).Does the gender of all non-self-containing genders contain itself? This is the fundamental question of gender theory.
No, it’s only Russell’s question.
Reminds me of the: everything is either a duck or not a duck
You’d think so, and yet…
that platypus look, hmm
Platypussoe ruin SO many assumptions, such as
- mammals don’t lay eggs
- mammals aren’t venomous
- mammals don’t have beaks/bills
- beavers can’t interbreed with ducks
- a deity created the world and deities don’t get drunk
Clearly all of those assumptions are wrong!
Black and white thinking got me here, sure it’ll get me out, too
That’s what I mean by ruining assumptions: proving them to be wrong lol
actually, technically it would be a trinary system, if we’re looking at it like a spectrum, and if we’re looking at it like a spectrum, i think it’s funnier to conceive of it like a circle. Or to get the point across, like those political alignment charts.
i think it’s funnier to conceive of it like a circle.
Unfortunately, conception is only possible when combining certain parts of that circle.
“Troll logic” is one of my favorite memes.
Exactly like being hit by lightning at any instant has a 50% risk because either it happens or it doesn’t.
Yes, but the probabilities (for the lightning) are not independent. So, while everyday there is a 50% chance to be hit be lightning, it’s the same outcome every day. If you didn’t get hit by lightning yesterday, you probably won’t today either.
What if you half die
“If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice”
I literally had my account on Reddit banned for saying that non-binary is discriminatory to hermaphrodites.
Actually I think you got banned for having freezer temp IQ
Pretty impressive actually to have a negative IQ.
Quite a specimen really
…but it’s not? and I thought the term intersex was preferred
How do you figure that? Also “hermaphrodite” is not the accurate term - that would refer to an organism which creates both gametes, which humans never do, even intersex ones.
No, that’s just quantum gender mechanics.
Probably because “hermaphrodite” is considered a slur to intersex people.
Also intersex and non-binary are not remotely the same thing. Some Intersex people are non-binary but a lot of them have binary identities. It’s a different axis.
It’s always hilarious and frustrating when people who don’t understand a topic try to disprove it. This is the same energy as flat earthers pointing to the horizon and going “See!?!” or anti-vaxxers pointing out people who still get sick.
Anyone who thinks this logic is compelling should actually crack a book. I’d recommend Judith butlers gender trouble, but this sort of meme is peak dunning kruger. Literally too ignorant of a topic to actually argue against it.
Wow you are stupid, aren’t you? It’s called a joke and not a debate.
I think it reads like a joke made by a nonbinary person
It’s always hilarious when people take jokes as if they’re literal
Sir, this is a shitpost.
When I see that kind of argument, I think of tri-state logic gates.
Those gates can be in 3 states High, Low, and Hi-Z.
If we look at non-binary people from that angle they must be in the Hi-Z state.
One day aliens are going to meet us and wonder what happened in our evolution that made us biased towards seeing every noun in groups of two, except for rules of nouns which are in groups of three.
I need examples or I don’t understand.
Male-female, darkness-light, plant-animal, ying-yang, mind-body, earth-heaven, spiritual-physical, prime-composite, even-odd
3 laws of motion, thermo, robotics, of dielect, and Trinity assignment.
Something strange about us that it is easier to think of opposites but following 3 rules.
plant-animal
I identify as a mushroom
That’s a fun thing to point out. The rules of 3 especially so, but it’s also using specific examples and lacking to see the complexity of of our ability to communicate and all the other words we have.
Androgynous, tomboy, femboy / twilight, murky, dim / fungus / Ying -Yang is cheating / spirit, form, will / limbo, underworld, cosmos, time / etc…
And even in rules, in Buddhism you have the 8 fold path, the 10 commandments, heck the 613 laws of God in Judaism.
Just don’t be going all “The Number 23” on us just cause it’s easy to find solution confirming biases in common numbers.
Sure there are counter examples. As for Buddhism he had the three great truths: no soul, no plan, everything dies.
Most of these groups are simply “A” and “Everything not A”. Either a number is odd or it is even. Either a place is lit up or it is dark.
That being said there are also some cases in there where there is more than just two categories (like male-female or plant-animal) but we, for the most part, only think about the most important / biggest ones.
All of this probably comes down to the fact that in order to make sense of the world or brain constantly tries to put things into categories to quickly assess what something is or isn’t. And it makes sense that the easiest way to categorize things is by just going “Is this A or B”?
Sure it makes a degree of sense. It is just easier to look at things that way, less cognitive load. It just didn’t have to be that way. We could have liked putting categories in groups of three.
That’s every binary, though. False are everything that’s not true. Ones are everything that’s not zero.
That’d effectively be a nested binary system
