(June 10, 2021 at 5:08 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(June 10, 2021 at 4:28 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:   Whoosh!

Yup, just blow through the inconvenient aspect of you being disingenuous in your replies to others.

You said you accept there are other minds without arguments. Pointing to physical skulls doesn't help because they belong to an external world, which a solipsist denies entirely. It's understandable that you would accept other minds without good arguments, what's not understandable is why you would require good arguments for anything else.

Uhm.. ecxept we WEREN'T talking about solipsism in the initial conversation, were we?

Still not addressing my actual comment either, are we?

So... misquoting and now misrepresenting me. Two for two.

If you're going to keep digging? At least dig up.

Not at work.

(June 10, 2021 at 4:15 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(June 10, 2021 at 4:05 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I don't know, I think I just have to see another human to know that one.  On a scale of 1-10, being our closeness to god, where do we rate?  Are we a near god like 9....or a lowly 1...or?  

Let's say a world didn't have gods in it, but did have humans in it.  Do you think that this would be a sufficient basis for accepting the existence of other minds as a fact?  Let's say a world had a god, but no humans.  How about then, are there...other minds in that world?

Yes it would be a sufficient basis for accepting other minds. I am not advocating that people turn into solipsists and live alone in psychiatric hospitals, either.... The problem of other minds is only important because it doesn't have conclusive logical arguments, but only arguments of analogical or probabilistic type... An atheist's position is usually just that with regards to God. We say that apparent design around us is sufficient basis to accept there is a God, they want more... well, if you want more about God, why didn't you ask for more about other minds...?

---

(June 10, 2021 at 4:10 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: No, there are actually quite a bit of extra assumptions between “I accept that you exist,” and “I accept that a supreme being who created reality, maintains it, interacts with his creation, loves and has a plan for them, and will dole out ultimate justice in an afterlife exists.” Which is what you believe.

I agree it's not the same thing. But "appearance of design pointing to a designer" and "things that look like people point to other minds" aren't really very different. And, no reason to mention love, plans and afterlife for now. I don't claim these arguments lead all the way to a personal God.

A designer, if could you prove design (which you can’t, or haven’t yet at least), definitely doesn’t get you to a personal god. But, as has been explained to you over and over here, appearance of design is not a reliable method for detecting design, because some things that appear designed are designed, and some things aren’t.

Klor really loves his conflations, doesn't he? He also loves avoiding the burden of proof for his beliefs and will go to any lengths to do so.

---

(June 10, 2021 at 5:45 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(June 10, 2021 at 4:15 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: Yes it would be a sufficient basis for accepting other minds. I am not advocating that people turn into solipsists and live alone in psychiatric hospitals, either.... The problem of other minds is only important because it doesn't have conclusive logical arguments, but only arguments of analogical or probabilistic type... An atheist's position is usually just that with regards to God. We say that apparent design around us is sufficient basis to accept there is a God, they want more... well, if you want more about God, why didn't you ask for more about other minds...?

---

I agree it's not the same thing. But "appearance of design pointing to a designer" and "things that look like people point to other minds" aren't really very different. And, no reason to mention love, plans and afterlife for now. I don't claim these arguments lead all the way to a personal God.

A designer, if could you prove design (which you can’t, or haven’t yet at least), definitely doesn’t get you to a personal god. But, as has been explained to you over and over here, appearance of design is not a reliable method for detecting design, because some things that appear designed are designed, and some things aren’t.

Also, you can't conflate demonstrably designed things to undemonstrable designed things.

(June 10, 2021 at 5:13 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

(June 10, 2021 at 5:08 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: You said you accept there are other minds without arguments. Pointing to physical skulls doesn't help because they belong to an external world, which a solipsist denies entirely. It's understandable that you would accept other minds without good arguments, what's not understandable is why you would require good arguments for anything else.

Uhm.. ecxept we WEREN'T talking about solipsism in the initial conversation, were we?

Still not addressing my actual comment either, are we?

So... misquoting and now misrepresenting me. Two for two.

If you're going to keep digging? At least dig up.

Not at work.

Also, his argument sucks because being willing to accept other minds is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for any old nonsense. The goal here is to sneak god in through the back door and little else. Could he be more disingenuous?

(June 10, 2021 at 9:21 pm)Helios Wrote: Also, his argument sucks because being willing to accept other minds is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for any old nonsense. The goal here is to sneak god in through the back door and little else. Could he be more disingenuous?

The argument is "if you accept one unprovable thing as true, you must accept them all".

(June 10, 2021 at 5:08 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(June 10, 2021 at 4:24 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Well, there you go then.  My accepting the existence of other minds is mundane as my noticing that you exist.  How close to a god are you?

Nobody here is denying that the existence of other minds is mundane... I am not a solipsist to deny that. But other minds are still referred to in philosophy as a problem.. why, in your opinion..? 

 

Exactly so, and, to the existence of other minds, your belief in a great fairy is no more relevant or useful to that end.  Theism is not a solution to the problem of hard solipsism that you see as a problem.  It's a full throated invocation of it's truth.

I insist, for example, that I only need observe other human existence to believe in other minds.  You assert, to the contrary, that those humans have no proper mind and indeed no free will. That all is the mind of god, all is the will of god - not the will of any or even all men.

You, Kloro, are arguing with yourself and your own god - not me...or any other atheist.

Quote:Nobody here in this forum managed to give a clear definition of design without begging their position. Contrasting nature with machines already begs the claim that nature is undesigned. This is something that one finds a lot in atheist literature. And it's enough for me to declare that they give dishonest definitions to things to short-circuit our arguments.

Atheists don't believe in a designer, therefore they think aspects of design we see around us are not sufficient... but aspects of things that look like people do point to other minds, you even called this mundane; why shouldn't the existence of a designer be mundane too, for the same reason?? 

No one here has to...... aside from you, as you're the only one who asserts that this particular design is real and true and demonstrable.  Obvious, no less, as your batshit assertions about the atheist position and their criteria engenders.  I'd say I'd wait for you to do so, but I know that you're incapable, because I know that what you believe...not only by my own metrics, but by your own, is simply untrue and cannot be true.  

Atheists, Kloro......don't believe in gods.  Atheists can and do believe in designs, which are certainly a real thing, which really exists. As other posters have noted, you believe things about yourself and the world and gods that cannot be concurrently true - and yet, you do believe them. I have no interest in litigating the truth of any given article of your belief, and see no reason to do so. I merely meant to point out that if you believe that atheists are wrong because they believe things that are wrong by their own standards as you see them....well, you've just indicted yourself on the same grounds.

You do not believe in free will, and yet you insist upon it's reality.

If you have the belief that everything happens according to god's plan, then you'll begin to see that Satan carries out god's will and thus God and Satan are the same being

Your worship of god is also a worship of Satan.

Believers don't want to see the evilness of their god so they create the character of Satan to carry out all the evil shit.

C'mon guys, my magic buuk is real. You know how I know? It tells me so.

Seriously, how can you argue with that?

(June 11, 2021 at 12:49 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote:

(June 10, 2021 at 5:08 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: Nobody here is denying that the existence of other minds is mundane... I am not a solipsist to deny that. But other minds are still referred to in philosophy as a problem.. why, in your opinion..? 

 

Exactly so, and, to the existence of other minds, your belief in a great fairy is no more relevant or useful to that end.  Theism is not a solution to the problem of hard solipsism that you see as a problem.  It's a full throated invocation of it's truth.

I insist, for example, that I only need observe other human existence to believe in other minds.  You assert, to the contrary, that those humans have no proper mind and indeed no free will. That all is the mind of god, all is the will of god - not the will of any or even all men.

You, Kloro, are arguing with yourself and your own god - not me...or any other atheist.

Quote:Nobody here in this forum managed to give a clear definition of design without begging their position. Contrasting nature with machines already begs the claim that nature is undesigned. This is something that one finds a lot in atheist literature. And it's enough for me to declare that they give dishonest definitions to things to short-circuit our arguments.

Atheists don't believe in a designer, therefore they think aspects of design we see around us are not sufficient... but aspects of things that look like people do point to other minds, you even called this mundane; why shouldn't the existence of a designer be mundane too, for the same reason?? 

No one here has to...... aside from you, as you're the only one who asserts that this particular design is real and true and demonstrable.  Obvious, no less, as your batshit assertions about the atheist position and their criteria engenders.  I'd say I'd wait for you to do so, but I know that you're incapable, because I know that what you believe...not only by my own metrics, but by your own, is simply untrue and cannot be true.  

Atheists, Kloro......don't believe in gods.  Atheists can and do believe in designs, which are certainly a real thing, which really exists.  As other posters have noted, you believe things about yourself and the world and gods that cannot be concurrently true - and yet, you do believe them.  I have no interest in litigating the truth of any given article of your belief, and see no reason to do so. I merely meant to point out that if you believe that atheists are wrong because they believe things that are wrong by their own standards as you see them....well, you've just indicted yourself on the same grounds.

You do not believe in free will, and yet you insist upon it's reality.

Klor never misses a chance to dodge the burden of proof. You have to kind of admire his dedication to its avoidance.

Oh, I dont..... I don't admire a single solitary thing about the person that Kloro has presented himself as, on these boards. He is and has always been, in effect, trying to convince us that he's a fucking loon....and I still don't believe him when he says it. Apparently, I think better of him than he thinks of himself, let alone me..in the idea that he could sell a petulant lie that he himself lacks the conviction towards.

I have many disagreements with the faith, but my fundamental disagreement with the faithful is that they consistently fail to instantiate a life or a position which fully expresses what they contend to believe. They all bullshit us... on themselves....and then, expect others to believe them - and even to believe that the ridiculous shit they assert is obvious to all? Get the fuck outta here....... that's not a serious position held by an actual human being who understands......well....seriousness. It's the assertion of some animal presupposition in contradiction to facts that they themselves otherwise accept.

Kloro, very obviously, doesn't believe that we have free will. There can only be gods will. But, for whatever reason, he feels compelled to lie not only to us, but to himself, about a thing which he could not convince himself of. Qeulle surprise.....