RE: Is God a logical contradiction?
February 18, 2020 at 6:54 pm
(This post was last modified: February 18, 2020 at 7:06 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Great, but if you'd like to refer to some facts of b, as in the above..then you're stuck with the body of facts of b.
I keep telling you that the issue of a stolen concept is not a disagreement on the contents of b. I don't know why you think that you're having that argument. No more than MA could understand why you would caution him about fmri's.
You are, again, arguing against the genetic validity of scientific observation. That's fine. Like I said, you might be right. Maybe we can't observe consciousness. If so, we cannot observe it's correlates, either. No more than we can observe voltage or it's correlates.
You just cant express that validly by referring to asserted facts of scientific observation. If you want to field that objection, then you'll have to keep science entirely out of your mouth. A valid objection, by reference to it's own assertions, for you...would be that we cannot observe consciousness, full stop. If we could observe it's correlates, then we could observe something about consciousness. The first half of your comment is self refuting with respect to the very last utterance. Get rid of the first half..and no problem...but no science, either. It's always your call. That's why they call it a stolen concept. Some thing from a directly contradictory position is seen to have value, and on the basis of this, an advocate for the other half of that contradictory position attempts to appropriate it for their own - to the detriment of the validity of their position.
I keep telling you that the issue of a stolen concept is not a disagreement on the contents of b. I don't know why you think that you're having that argument. No more than MA could understand why you would caution him about fmri's.
You are, again, arguing against the genetic validity of scientific observation. That's fine. Like I said, you might be right. Maybe we can't observe consciousness. If so, we cannot observe it's correlates, either. No more than we can observe voltage or it's correlates.
You just cant express that validly by referring to asserted facts of scientific observation. If you want to field that objection, then you'll have to keep science entirely out of your mouth. A valid objection, by reference to it's own assertions, for you...would be that we cannot observe consciousness, full stop. If we could observe it's correlates, then we could observe something about consciousness. The first half of your comment is self refuting with respect to the very last utterance. Get rid of the first half..and no problem...but no science, either. It's always your call. That's why they call it a stolen concept. Some thing from a directly contradictory position is seen to have value, and on the basis of this, an advocate for the other half of that contradictory position attempts to appropriate it for their own - to the detriment of the validity of their position.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
