A question for deep thinkers and simple thinkers!
Forums › General Discussion › A question for deep thinkers and simple thinkers!-
bye🎵 wrote:
Studing the Christian faith doesn't make one a christian. The logical proof for Gods existance is that without Him you couldn't prove anything.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote: I assumed you to be atheist. You don't know anything. ;)
I assumed you to be wacko, so I knew that much. I wasn't always an atheist. I have formal study of the Christian bible over several years. I recognize your arguments and refuse to play your twisted game. I substitute my own.You don't know God. You have blind faith in God. Otherwise, provide logical proof that God exists. If you can't do that with God's own laws, well. Make your own judgement.
-
Mr brown can you know anything? If you can I want to know how and why it's valid.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
My friend, to have disagreements, to call something perverse to make statements to work the scientific method you have to assume your position correct before you state it. [...] To make assertions you have to know truth and to know truth it has to reflect conceptions that govern them. These laws of logic are not man made they are just observed by man conceptions of reality. When we call them "laws" nevertheless does it discount their existance. They are absolutes.
LOL WHAT?!
No!
You do NOT start with an answer when testing things using the scientific method, you start with a hypothesis and test its validity.
To make an assertion you do not need to know truth. I could say my cheese hat gives people a magical power to fly with their arms. I make the assertion irrespective of truth.
Logic does NOT dictate how the world works, it is a codified set of principles that humans use to make inferences about the world.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
bye🎵 wrote:
I assumed you to be atheist. You don't know anything. ;)Augustine: I never mentioned this in my little resume, (while I still wait for yours), but I am in fact an atheist.
You are obviously speaking from what I would call a separate reality.
To once again answer your question:
The laws of logic are not built into reality.
The laws of logic are not universal.
The laws of logic are not absolute.
The laws of logic are not bestowed on us from God.
The laws of logic only exist on paper and in human thought.
If you have any further questions, please speak with my receptionist.
Ad Hominem.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Mystery wrote:
I'm sorry but I made a Wrong one there. The one trying to prove quantum mechanics assumes the laws of logic or else they aren't looking to prove anything.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Um, no, quantum physics really doesn't & Brown isn't lying.bye🎵 wrote:
Quantum mechanics assumes the laws of logic. Unless you don't know what quantum mechanics are. Then you claim you know something you don't know which is lying.Still waiting on your answer to the quantum mechanics dilemma...
Again, scientist don't set out to prove something, they set out to investigate something.
That being said, classical logic does not apply to quantum mechanics.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Bayani wrote:
Because you can find the law of non contradiction under a rock or can you measure it's mass. But it holds true in every where.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Do you understand the laws to be terminology rather than transendents? If you are then you are limiting this as terminology which isn't true in its ontology.
Transcendent? Is this a special pleading? On what basis do you believe these "laws" are "transcendent"?
Then you're wrong.
LNC doesn't hold true everywhere. -
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote: Then you can not make any objections when I say then they are universal. See what I'm talking about? With out the law of non contrdiction being assumed in your assertion you cant defend anything that contradict it. It can not be true and false at the same time and the same way. But if you assert that it can then it can not be either true or false. Basic logic.
You forgot to follow my instructions. I can reason without your god. -
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Wait... Posit that again? Use the logical method. Statement...[]...statement...therefore statement. It must pass all fallacies to be correct. These are God's rules, not mine.bye🎵 wrote:
Studing the Christian faith doesn't make one a christian. The logical proof for Gods existance is that without Him you couldn't prove anything.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote: I assumed you to be atheist. You don't know anything. ;)
I assumed you to be wacko, so I knew that much. I wasn't always an atheist. I have formal study of the Christian bible over several years. I recognize your arguments and refuse to play your twisted game. I substitute my own.You don't know God. You have blind faith in God. Otherwise, provide logical proof that God exists. If you can't do that with God's own laws, well. Make your own judgement.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote: Then you can not make any objections when I say then they are universal. See what I'm talking about? With out the law of non contrdiction being assumed in your assertion you cant defend anything that contradict it. It can not be true and false at the same time and the same way. But if you assert that it can then it can not be either true or false. Basic logic.
Yes, he can say that; you're stating they are universal, Brown and I contest that.
You however make the Strawman argument that we are saying classical logic does not apply ANYWHERE. It doesn't.
You also make the Strawman that by saying that classical logic applies, that it is absolute. It isnt.
For someone who claims to know "basic" logic, you do not demonstrate it. You have a shocking ability to repeatedly make the same logical fallacies, time and time again.
-
Bayani wrote:
I concur.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote: Then you can not make any objections when I say then they are universal. See what I'm talking about? With out the law of non contrdiction being assumed in your assertion you cant defend anything that contradict it. It can not be true and false at the same time and the same way. But if you assert that it can then it can not be either true or false. Basic logic.
Yes, he can say that; you're stating they are universal, Brown and I contest that.
You however make the Strawman argument that we are saying classical logic does not apply ANYWHERE. It doesn't.
You also make the Strawman that by saying that classical logic applies, that it is absolute. It isnt.
For someone who claims to know "basic" logic, you do not demonstrate it. You have a shocking ability to repeatedly make the same logical fallacies, time and time again.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
With statements like that, you'll drive away anyone that might have been interested in God. The smugness is just awful.bye🎵 wrote:
I assumed you to be atheist. You don't know anything. ;)Augustine: I never mentioned this in my little resume, (while I still wait for yours), but I am in fact an atheist.
You are obviously speaking from what I would call a separate reality.
To once again answer your question:
The laws of logic are not built into reality.
The laws of logic are not universal.
The laws of logic are not absolute.
The laws of logic are not bestowed on us from God.
The laws of logic only exist on paper and in human thought.
If you have any further questions, please speak with my receptionist.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
bye🎵 wrote:
Studing the Christian faith doesn't make one a christian. The logical proof for Gods existance is that without Him you couldn't prove anything.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote: I assumed you to be atheist. You don't know anything. ;)
I assumed you to be wacko, so I knew that much. I wasn't always an atheist. I have formal study of the Christian bible over several years. I recognize your arguments and refuse to play your twisted game. I substitute my own.You don't know God. You have blind faith in God. Otherwise, provide logical proof that God exists. If you can't do that with God's own laws, well. Make your own judgement.
Not a logical proof. Circular reasoning.
Duh.
-
1. The sky is blue
2. Blue is a color
3. ?????
4. Therefore Profit. -
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Mr brown can you know anything? If you can I want to know how and why it's valid.
You "know" things through applying critical thinking skills, such as rationality, reason, and logic.
-
Mystery wrote:
Of what?Conceptions are views.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
/facepalmMystery wrote:
Of what?Conceptions are views.
-
Ladies and gentlemen! We are about to witness the first logical proof of God's existence! In a few short moments, Augustine will throw 4D20, add 7 to his charisma score, and prove once and for all that the creator must exist!
If you are just tuning in, we are anxiously awaiting the outcome of Augustine's best effort using God's own API, to determine not only that a divine creator exists, but which divine creator! Is it Buddah? Jehovah? Vishnu? Gitche Manitou? Perhaps it will turn out to be multiple gods as Aristotle predicted! Let's wait and see!
-
Bayani wrote:
How did you know your hypothesis is correct? Because of the truth of the examination? How do you know the reality of what is true and what is wrong? You use the law of non contrdiction to make that test valid, if not then it would neither be true or false.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
My logic are not man made they are just observed nevertheless does it discount their existance. They are absolutes.
LOL WHAT?!
No!
You do NOT start with an and test its validity.
To make an assertion you do not need to know truth. I could say my cheese hat gives people a magical power to fly with their arms. I make the assertion irrespective of truth.
Logic does NOT dictate how the world works, it is a codified set of principles that humans use to make inferences about the world.
-
Bayani wrote:
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Mr brown can you know anything? If you can I want to know how and why it's valid.
You "know" things through applying critical thinking skills, such as rationality, reason, and logic.
This question is aimed at brown. -
Strawman.
No one is saying that LNC never applies in scientific investigations. -
Also a false dichotomy. All this talk of the second law of logic, and you've forgotten the one about the excluded middle.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Validity is optional. Look at you. You know lots of things that are invalid. I know things through instinct and experience, using a brain evolved from a reptilian.Bayani wrote:
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Mr brown can you know anything? If you can I want to know how and why it's valid.
You "know" things through applying critical thinking skills, such as rationality, reason, and logic.
This question is aimed at brown.
-
Bayani wrote:
Lol! As I already stated, the word concept is a synonym for view.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
/facepalmMystery wrote:
Of what?Conceptions are views.
-
Bayani wrote:
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
bye🎵 wrote:
Studing the Christian faith doesn't make one a christian. The logical proof for Gods existance is that without Him you couldn't prove anything.₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote: I assumed you to be atheist. You don't know anything. ;)
I assumed you to be wacko, so I knew that much. I wasn't always an atheist. I have formal study of the Christian bible over several years. I recognize your arguments and refuse to play your twisted game. I substitute my own.You don't know God. You have blind faith in God. Otherwise, provide logical proof that God exists. If you can't do that with God's own laws, well. Make your own judgement.
Not a logical proof. Circular reasoning.
Duh.
-
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Bayani wrote:
₳ʉ₲ʉṣϮḭ₦ê (₳ⓑ€) wrote:
Mr brown can you know anything? If you can I want to know how and why it's valid.
You "know" things through applying critical thinking skills, such as rationality, reason, and logic.
This question is aimed at brown.
Non-Sequitor.
The validity of a claim is not dictated by a particular person proclaiming it.It doesn't matter who gives you the answer.
-
What exactly is the point of this thread? It seems your entire goal is to try to trap people into contradicting themselves & then point out how they fell for your trick. You seem to think that has happened several times, others disagree. Regardless, it doesn't seem you are actually interested in a discussion of people's beliefs on the laws of logic.
-
Ahem... I WAS a Christian, thank you. Your statement is irrelevant. Now I suppose you think I I'm infested with demons or some other such nonsense.
I'm waiting for so many responses, but the ones you do give are still entertaining. Do go on.
-
Mystery wrote:
Yes, we were just discussing that through back channels. He wants to trick people into his pyramid scheme, cult, terrorist organization, whatever... And exclaim AH-HA! You just proved me to be your mental superior!What exactly is the point of this thread? It seems your entire goal is to try to trap people into contradicting themselves & then point out how they fell for your trick. You seem to think that has happened several times, others disagree. Regardless, it doesn't seem you are actually interested in a discussion of people's beliefs on the laws of logic.
-
I really am actually very interested in his God truth statement. I don't know what that would look like. It may even spark global excitement.
-
Oh...
My...
God...
proofthatgodexists.org
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC