Aidan, Yuyutsu... I reckon it might be time to stop feeding the troll, fellas. She's clearly just hungry for attention.

In the paper it is proven by logic that when mathematics/science ends in contradiction you can prove anything you want in mathematics ie you can prove Fermat's last theorem and you can disprove Fermats last theorem

It should also be born in ind that
The paper also proves in logic that all opinions are equally valid ie feminism is valid and anti-feminism is valid. Also the opinions for gay marriage are valid: for gay marriage and against gay marriage are equally valid

Ok Sara. Let's look at this from where you want it to go. Give it a chance.

If all opinions are equal, where do you go from there. For arguments sake, let's ignore that we disagree with the origional point. It sounds like an opening point to lead to another. What's the point you want to address from there?

Where do you go when all opinions are equal?

For me, I have come to terms of some things being right and others not. That being trained by those who know a skill, makes their judgment on that trade valuable. Their opinions greater then those who know nothing of that skill. I have also seen both lies and truths fight for a spotlight. Knowing that the truth is greater then fiction is. Even to say that one way of life can be harmful, and another healthy, so listening to those who have lived longer is also of more value because they can see past the philosophy and see what was harmful and what was healthy.

I tell you this so that you know, we will not agree with the first point, that all opinions are equal. But for arguments sake let's ignore that. If all opinions are equal, where do you go from there?

All opinions for and against something are equally valid

All things are possible

Now with the inconsistency of language
all possible views and their negation are
now possible and equally valid Thus the
philosophies of Kant Hegal Plato
Aristotle etc all philosophies and the
negation/opposite of the philosophies of
Kant Hegal Plato Aristotle etc all
philosophies are now possible and equally
valid

and

in the every day world this means that all
views are valid but so are the opposing
views valid Thus all civil rights views are
valid ie pro gay marriage is valid but so is
the opposing view ie anti-gay marriage is
valid
as
Each view contains within it its negation
as all views end in meaninglessness

Thus
We can now just treat all views/ philosophies esthetically that is for their logical and argumentative beauty rather than for any scientific or truth value just like one treats poetry painting music for their esthetic beauty

Ok, so first you don't need math condrictions to make the point that there can be beauty in any philosophy. You don't even need to say that those philosophies have validity, or even that they are true.

However, that point that there is beauty in any philosophy isn't always true.

That said. The undertone of your comment should be worth discussing. Being accepting to any and all philosophies.

There's a difference between be accepting and being loving. Some things are rejected purely because they are unhealthy. It's a parent's job to steer their children into healthy attitudes and knowing the truths of the world, so to prepare them for adulthood and help them grow. It also means trying to help them out of negitive philosophies and negitive influences.

For example anorexic philosophies are unhealthy and harmful. There is no beauty in thinking that starving yourself makes you beautiful. It is not equally valid as other philosophies.