Welsh Cake Wrote:Responding to fr0d0's claim that logic alone can't disprove the concept of god? Oh wait, that was a rhetorical question right? My bad.

Well, fr0d0's probably right. If "God" is defined as the creator of the universe (which would probably include logic)... then it could be said too that "God" exists outside of logic and logic is irrelevant to "God's" existence.

Saerules Wrote:If logic cannot refute logically impossible concepts (Read: concepts logic has already refuted)... then the concepts weren't logically impossible to begin with.

Welsh Cake Wrote:Okay... then what's stopping you from arguing that a square is also a circle?

? That would be a logically impossible concept to begin with... hence if logic could not refute it: it would be a fine square that is also a circle. I honestly don't understand what point you are trying to make here... perhaps you will tell me?

Saerules Wrote:If logic can (which if you are already considering logically impossible concepts it must be true that it does)

Welsh Cake Wrote:Err, no. Logically impossible concepts aren't ever true, that's why they're refutable and not supported ideas to begin with, they're simply subjective conceivable ideas that sounded clever at the time, but have no basis objectively whatsoever in the real world. You probably already know this much.

Way to rip a sentence in half: If logic can (which if you are already considering logically impossible concepts it must be true that it does) refute logically impossible concepts (concepts already refuted by logic)... then that's just stating tautology.

Either way, to address your new statements: we have no grounds to consider logically impossible concepts "untrue" except in logic. It could still easily apply in reality, and there is nothing to prove otherwise. Considering that all of our knowledge is assumed correctness... we cannot prove that all we know of "reality" is not a delusion that has no basis in the "real world" (if you will).

(March 4, 2010 at 3:16 am)Saerules Wrote: [quote=Welsh Cake]Responding to fr0d0's claim that logic alone can't disprove the concept of god? Oh wait, that was a rhetorical question right? My bad.

(March 4, 2010 at 3:16 am)Saerules Wrote: Well, fr0d0's probably right. If "God" is defined as the creator of the universe (which would probably include logic)... then it could be said too that "God" exists outside of logic and logic is irrelevant to "God's" existence.

You're forgetting that fr0d0 also assigned properties to God: a nature, which he cannot act against. He makes the point that God just "is", which would also point to the law of identity, and the law of non-contradiction. God exists, and he has certain attributes. That doesn't sound illogical to me and seems like God is subject to the same rules of logic we all are.

What is illogical is that theists make these assumptions without any evidence to support the claim; they assume, then they rationalize.

@ Tav: the evidence is logical evidence. The assumptions are theories that most make sense and are thus taken as such. The dishonesty you apply is in changing the subject and saying that because the logic fails the test of the foreign subject it must be false.

(March 4, 2010 at 5:09 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: @ Tav: the evidence is logical evidence. The assumptions are theories that most make sense and are thus taken as such. The dishonesty you apply is in changing the subject and saying that because the logic fails the test of the foreign subject it must be false.

Can you elaborate and be more specific please?

(March 4, 2010 at 6:27 pm)tavarish Wrote: Can you elaborate and be more specific please?

Good luck with that.

Haha yeah *escorts tavarish into the abyss...*

Me I'm like the Piraha. I live for the moment and everything is in my own thoughts. You could go check the summa and work it out for yourself of course.

(March 5, 2010 at 3:10 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Haha yeah *escorts tavarish into the abyss...*

Me I'm like the Piraha. I live for the moment and everything is in my own thoughts. You could go check the summa and work it out for yourself of course.

...I'm guessing that's a no then.

That's what I get for asking fr0d0 anything specific.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

you want me to elaborate on the meaning of life and of everything ...it's 42

Fr0d0 Wrote:you want me to elaborate on the meaning of life and of everything ...it's 42

He's right, you know...

(March 5, 2010 at 4:34 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: you want me to elaborate on the meaning of life and of everything ...it's 42

How original.

I want you to elaborate on your claims. Try not to bring up Vogons, Babel fish, Zaphod Beeblebrox, or Restaurants at the end of the universe.