Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 31, 2024, 11:41 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A Non-Violent Solution?
#51
RE: A Non-Violent Solution?
(February 16, 2012 at 12:28 am)genkaus Wrote: Yes, it is truly futile for you to try and talk intelligently.

With people as ignorant and arrogant as you, I guess so.

(February 16, 2012 at 3:15 am)genkaus Wrote: If you think that an axiom depends upon any other things, then you must really not understand what an axiom means.

If you believe an axiom to be anything other than an unproven assumption that is used as the basis to begin to build a logical formalism, then not only are you spreading lies about what can or cannot be proven, but you are also spreading lies about logical formalism itself, and the very nature of axioms.

You're really no different from a radical Christian Fundamentalists who spreads similar lies about ancient Hebrew mythologies.

Lies are lies. And spreading false information is wrong. Even when done innocently because of personal misunderstanding. I believe that you are indeed just grossly naive and that you have a gross misunderstanding of logic. Not unlike the radical Christian fundies, it's not doubt that you believe your own delusions. So you no doubt believe your own ignorance.

But the truth is that no professional scientific, mathematical, or philosophical community would support your arrogant nonsense. Your personal opinions on this matter are absolutely not supported by any professional community.

You're never going to sell your ignorance to me. I know better. You'll have to find ignorant uneducated people to sell your false logic to.

It's truly a shame that people like you exist. All you do is cause innocent people to believe your misunderstandings.

What you're spreading is lies. Whether intentional or just due to your own ignorance. Either way it's false information. You're no different from a radical fundamental religious extremest.

You're just spreading your own lame opinions as if they are the indisputable word of God.

Hogwash.

That fact that anyone would even support your views, only shows that atheism can indeed by like a religion where people climb on board a faith-based agenda to support lies just because they feel like it.

Humanity to date, is simply not armed with sufficient information about the true nature of reality to even remotely be able to make any decisive claims about what may or may not be possible.

You're faith-based belief in the power of your axiom of existence, is basically a faith-based religion on your part.

That fact that you can't see that, only shows that you don't have anymore ability to open your mind than a Christian fundamentalist.

Your axiom of existence has become your "God".

And you worship it like a dutiful servant. Worship

~~~~

In fact, not only does your axiom have no clout when considering the question of the true nature of reality, but our very system of "logic" has no clout.

We have absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that the true nature of reality should even need to conform to ideas and concepts that we deem to be 'logical'.

On the contrary, observations in Quantum Mechanics has revealed to us that the quantum world most likely obeys laws that we would deem to be "illogical".

General Relativity shows us that the true nature of time (whatever that might even be) is most likely something that completely defies anything that we would deem to be logical.

In short, your very assumption that the true nature of reality even need to be 'logical' in terms of how a human brain makes sense of things has no merit.

If it can't even be determined that the true nature of reality must even adhere to what we deem to be 'logical', then that totally pull the rug out from under any axioms we may personally believe to be 'logical'.

You can't even demand that reality must be 'logical' much less demand that it must adhere to your favorite pet axioms.

~~~

All you're doing is displaying an extremely limited ability to even begin to think beyond "classical logic 101". And you clearly don't even understand how that simple subject works.

So, yes, it is futile for me to try to talk to you intelligently, because you evidently aren't capable of comprehending real intelligence. All you're doing is hiding in a classical box of very simplistic logic and pretending that nothing can possibly exist beyond that.

That's all you're doing.

And then you're expecting me to climb into that very limited box with you?

No way.

Christian - A moron who believes that an all-benevolent God can simultaneously be a hateful jealous male-chauvinistic pig.
Wiccan - The epitome of cerebral evolution having mastered the magical powers of the universe and is in eternal harmony with the mind of God.
Atheist - An ill-defined term that means something different to everyone who uses it.
~~~~~
Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.
Clearly Jesus (a fictitious character or otherwise) will forgive people if they merely know not what they do
For the Bible Tells us so!
Reply



Messages In This Thread
A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 13, 2012 at 11:59 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Minimalist - February 14, 2012 at 12:06 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Jackalope - February 14, 2012 at 12:39 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by padraic - February 14, 2012 at 1:16 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 1:19 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by KichigaiNeko - February 14, 2012 at 1:22 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Minimalist - February 14, 2012 at 2:02 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by KichigaiNeko - February 14, 2012 at 2:18 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by AthiestAtheist - February 14, 2012 at 1:29 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Jackalope - February 14, 2012 at 3:41 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by KichigaiNeko - February 14, 2012 at 1:31 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by padraic - February 14, 2012 at 4:42 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by leo-rcc - February 14, 2012 at 4:58 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by KichigaiNeko - February 14, 2012 at 5:06 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by LastPoet - February 14, 2012 at 7:16 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by KichigaiNeko - February 14, 2012 at 8:05 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by LastPoet - February 14, 2012 at 10:23 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Aardverk - February 14, 2012 at 11:01 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 1:49 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Doubting Thomas - February 14, 2012 at 11:56 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by KichigaiNeko - February 15, 2012 at 2:44 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Minimalist - February 14, 2012 at 12:25 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by LastPoet - February 14, 2012 at 2:09 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 2:27 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 14, 2012 at 2:36 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 2:48 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 14, 2012 at 3:10 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 3:45 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 14, 2012 at 4:50 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 5:20 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 15, 2012 at 8:27 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 15, 2012 at 11:52 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 15, 2012 at 4:14 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 15, 2012 at 8:34 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 16, 2012 at 3:15 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 16, 2012 at 12:25 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 16, 2012 at 2:52 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 16, 2012 at 3:59 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 17, 2012 at 7:06 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 17, 2012 at 3:05 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 17, 2012 at 4:37 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 17, 2012 at 6:48 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 18, 2012 at 9:51 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 18, 2012 at 2:15 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 18, 2012 at 5:41 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Anomalocaris - February 15, 2012 at 12:18 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 15, 2012 at 1:58 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Violet - February 14, 2012 at 2:13 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by LastPoet - February 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 2:41 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by LastPoet - February 14, 2012 at 2:57 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Violet - February 14, 2012 at 2:47 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 14, 2012 at 2:57 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Minimalist - February 14, 2012 at 2:50 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Violet - February 14, 2012 at 3:06 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by padraic - February 15, 2012 at 6:24 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 15, 2012 at 7:21 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 16, 2012 at 12:28 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Cosmic Ape - February 16, 2012 at 12:29 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Rusko - February 16, 2012 at 1:04 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Cosmic Ape - February 18, 2012 at 6:10 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 18, 2012 at 6:45 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Cosmic Ape - February 18, 2012 at 7:21 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 19, 2012 at 9:03 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 19, 2012 at 12:49 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 19, 2012 at 3:20 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 19, 2012 at 6:49 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by genkaus - February 20, 2012 at 4:01 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 18, 2012 at 7:45 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Cosmic Ape - February 19, 2012 at 12:33 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by KichigaiNeko - February 18, 2012 at 11:46 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 19, 2012 at 3:21 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by padraic - February 19, 2012 at 3:02 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by LastPoet - February 19, 2012 at 7:14 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Violet - February 19, 2012 at 9:14 am
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Violet - February 19, 2012 at 4:40 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Violet - February 19, 2012 at 7:30 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 19, 2012 at 8:10 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Violet - February 19, 2012 at 8:29 pm
RE: A Non-Violent Solution? - by Abracadabra - February 19, 2012 at 9:13 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Can you be a "Non religious muslim"? Woah0 31 1950 August 22, 2022 at 8:22 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Persistent Non-Symbolic Experiences Ahriman 0 561 August 18, 2021 at 4:05 pm
Last Post: Ahriman
  Questions about the European renaissance and religion to non believers Quill01 6 728 January 31, 2021 at 7:16 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  God as a non-creator Fake Messiah 13 1780 January 21, 2020 at 8:36 am
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Being can come from non-being Alex K 55 7549 January 15, 2020 at 10:40 pm
Last Post: Jehanne
  Being cannot come from Non-being Otangelo 147 14582 January 7, 2020 at 7:08 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  How do religious folks reconcile violent concepts in "peaceful" Abrahamic religions? AceBoogie 57 11304 April 28, 2017 at 1:46 pm
Last Post: Huggy Bear
  Non Sequitur Minimalist 8 1598 August 20, 2016 at 4:33 am
Last Post: Little lunch
  Deism vs Religion (Non-guidance vs guidance). Mystic 21 3935 March 1, 2016 at 2:18 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Jesus the Jew, yet non-Jew Foxaèr 21 3675 January 19, 2016 at 1:03 am
Last Post: Wyrd of Gawd



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)