RE: Good exists - a Catholic comments
August 20, 2023 at 9:17 pm
(This post was last modified: August 20, 2023 at 9:25 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
It's not a series of non seqs...or any fallacy, at all. That's why it's deemed successful. It might be wrong for any number of reasons, but logical validity isn't one of them.
My personal favorite objection is to start with an antithetical initial premise. Just as, if you accept that a god possibly exists in some world, modal logic will tell you that a god necessarily exists in all worlds..if you accept the premise that a god possibly does not exist in some world, modal logic will tell you that gods are necessarily nonexistent in all worlds. Technically, the antithetical premise is implicit in the possible world god premise (as all the worlds without gods are worlds where it's not only possible, but actual, that a god does not exist).
-and that, is why it's famously described as successful, but unconvincing. Sometimes it helps to think of logic like a word game. Just as a tv mentalist can arrange for an initial set of variables that inevitably leads to just one conclusion after any number of seemingly complicated steps in their at-home audience .... a committed logician can exclude all but the desirable answer by an identical process. It's not that this is invalid, a fallacy, against the rules.....it's just a limitation of our logical system. It's a game, so it can be gamed.
My personal favorite objection is to start with an antithetical initial premise. Just as, if you accept that a god possibly exists in some world, modal logic will tell you that a god necessarily exists in all worlds..if you accept the premise that a god possibly does not exist in some world, modal logic will tell you that gods are necessarily nonexistent in all worlds. Technically, the antithetical premise is implicit in the possible world god premise (as all the worlds without gods are worlds where it's not only possible, but actual, that a god does not exist).
-and that, is why it's famously described as successful, but unconvincing. Sometimes it helps to think of logic like a word game. Just as a tv mentalist can arrange for an initial set of variables that inevitably leads to just one conclusion after any number of seemingly complicated steps in their at-home audience .... a committed logician can exclude all but the desirable answer by an identical process. It's not that this is invalid, a fallacy, against the rules.....it's just a limitation of our logical system. It's a game, so it can be gamed.
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!
