The Paradox

How was my arse created?

 

The snake of course.

 

Like Oroborus, the serpent biting its own tail, your arse was created by the act of observation when you stuck your head so far up it that you can no longer smell your own shit.

 

So who created the observers?

 

That would have counted as an intelligent discussion compared to the one I'm having with Zanza. I just can't help but answer:

Zanza, you are the observer creating the arse which in turn creates your observation. You ARE orbororus. Behold, gentlemen, the insoluable paradox that is Zanza.

 

So what created Zanza in the first place?

 

Eh... what? Is this a joke I'm taking too seriously or just something I don't understand?

 

No it's ok, it's actually just something I don't understand.

 

It's not actually true, though, is it?

 

Cool beans! I just thought I was missing some brain, there!

 

Where does this guy get his material?

 

That's easy;
You did. I could go for the literal route and say your parents did, but they're not responsible for how you're behaving. You created yourself through observation of the world around you.

 

If things are really created by observation of them, what observed what to create an observer that seemed to already be there, as it was observing already?

 

... Unless they're only actually changed by an observation of them...

So, does that mean something like the mind, which is in constant observation of itself, stays that way because of that? Does something look different when nobody is looking at it?

 

I say I say I say, what do you get when you draw a straight line along the equator then another straight up to the north pole, then another straight down to your starting point?

Why, you get a triangle with more than 180 degrees! Hah, I knew I wasn't completely making it up.

Each line from equator to pole has an angle of 90 degrees, making it 180 + the internal angle at which the two meet.

Having a two-dimensional concept meet the three dimensional reality creates a paradox which is no paradox at all, just reality outstripping language and imagination.

 

I think not.

A triangle is a two dimensional shape, and wouldn't giving it depth by placing it on a curved plane make it three dimensional?

A straight line along a curved surface?

 

If a triangle is a closed shape of three straight lines on a plane, then its a paradox.

If a triangle is a two dimensional shape on a perfectly flat plane, then there is no paradox because my example is not technically a triangle.
My whole point is that our definitions do not always allow for the extra dimensions of reality.

 

The fact that the triangle intrinsically possesses properties neccessitating axioms like its angles add up to two right angles, means that anything that doesn't adhere to this is not a triangle.

You could go on to say things like an earthquake on mars should be called a 'marsquake' by not looking at what the definition of the thing is, and just that of the word.

Just because it's called a triangle, doesn't mean that anything with only three angles is a triangle.