Like I said, all the premises are just helpful tools. The only premise that counts at the end is seeing there is an accurate you that exists only precisely in the vision of God. You see that, and the game is over. It's over and you are well under way to guidance if you do.

---

Thanks for the dialogue LadyForCamus. Perhaps we can revisit these reminders of God seeing us exactly as we are later and it be sufficient proof and reminder of God that he is a witness upon all things, and that surely he is what sees us and upholds every soul by what it has earned.

I will move on to other reminders in Quran, so that who wants, may remember and become mindful of what they always knew.

Multi-door approach and we will see a better phrasing of the moral argument and many versions of it in Quran next inshallah.

And we so far are just getting some building blocks as far as proof of Islam and Quran goes. We will see in time the majestic way Quran reiterates itself endlessly inshallah.

Then we can discuss whether it's conclusively proven to be beyond humans capability or not.

(November 17, 2018 at 11:03 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(November 17, 2018 at 10:58 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Demonstrably false. Got anything else, or...?

It's not false. If there is no real you, you don't have any direction to estimate or guestimate or move towards. No poling guidance to estimate who you. It's a fabrication, an illusion in your mind.

It is false. It is a false dichotomy. The choices are not just, “total perfection”, and “total chaos.”  But let’s say I grant you that our mind’s existence would be total chaos with no objective guidance.  So what? What does that have to do with the existence of a god?

The point is you know better and you been reminded of something great. Just take your time to reflect. Multi-door approach, we will come back to this later. Let's look at other reminders of God's existence and oneness per Quran.

That's the densest shit I've ever heard.  The only thing you've reminded anyone of in this thread is that you would very much like for some state of affairs other than the one you are incapable of ruling out.

Reminded, ofc, isn't the best word..because no one had forgotten that your beliefs are formed from a desperate wish to free yourself from deep existential anxiety.

I'm off to sleep Dear LadyForCamus. Thanks again for the dialogue!

(November 17, 2018 at 11:28 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: The point is you know better and you been reminded of something great.

In other words, you are uncomfortable with that possibility and you’re projecting that discomfort onto me, lol.  That’s not a reason, MK.  It’s a feeling. Your whole argument is born of the horror you feel imagining the possibility of a chaotic world with no objective meaning. I’m sorry for that, but you have demonstrated nothing about a god, or objective value in this thread.

We'll talk tomorrow. Good night!

(November 17, 2018 at 11:28 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: The point is you know better and you been reminded of something great.

AKA: “I know my argument is shit, but I’ll keep asserting my conclusion ad nauseam until someone is foolish enough to believe me.”

G’night.

(November 17, 2018 at 2:51 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Anyways, we've discussed this argument endlessly.  It's been clarified and can be summarized in two premises:

If God doesn't exist or see us exactly as we are, we are an illusion.
We aren't an illusion.

A few additional thoughts. I think there might be some equivocating going on here with the use of the word “illusion”; not that fixing the problem is going to save your argument from its larger flaws, but I think it’s worth noting.

In the first premise you seem to be insinuating that if a god doesn’t exist, then this notion of a perfect, objective self would be illusory to us. But, in the second premise (we are not an illusion) you seem to be talking about our very existence as beings not being an illusion; as in, ‘we do in fact exist, therefore we are not an illusion.’  Almost everyone here disputes the former, but I can’t imagine very many people disagreeing with the latter. That can appear sneaky. You have to be clear about what you mean when you choose words to use in an argument, because things like this can come across as dishonest.

(November 17, 2018 at 11:40 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: We'll talk tomorrow. Good night!

I think that is a threat, LfC.  Perhaps you should call the police?