RE: Burden of Proof
January 8, 2013 at 5:56 pm
(This post was last modified: January 8, 2013 at 6:09 pm by Mark 13:13.)
(January 8, 2013 at 3:27 pm)Rhythm Wrote: "SuperRhythm, by definition, is that for which no greater can be conceived. SuperRhythm exists in the understanding. If SuperRhythm exists in the understanding, we could imagine SuperRhythm to be greater by existing in reality. Therefore, SuperRhythm must exist."
What, might I ask, is the logical justification for existence being greater than non-existence by the by? Does creating this definition actually prove that any entity matches the definition? Godel clearly thought very highly of his imagination/intuition, and it's ability to do magic, he was also clearly not a linguist.
(try gaskings parody btw)
Whatever he was, his ideas or at least some caused the something of an earth quake in several field that require mathematics and logic and his mode of thinking has to be respected based on the contribution he has made.
(January 8, 2013 at 3:40 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(January 8, 2013 at 3:12 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: "God, by definition, is that for which no greater can be conceived. God exists in the understanding. If God exists in the understanding, we could imagine Him to be greater by existing in reality. Therefore, God must exist." Goedel.
Seriously?! The Ontological Argument for the existence of god?
You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Quote:I have learned that I must read more from this guy.
Kurt Godel was a brilliant mathematician, If you read more of him, read about his expertise in math (Read - 'Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid' by Douglas Hofstadter. Brilliant book). But his math prowess make him no more of an expert of the existence of a god as you, which seeing as how you seem to fall for every fallacious argument, is not saying much.
All true but he seems someone in tune with my mental processes just on a higher level so for me I need to read. And you point about just because he knows his maths doesn't make him an expert on everything. So it almost begs the question who are the experts we need to look to when we want to discuss the existence or non existence of God. ps I googled the book and yes I think you are right so I will order and read it. Many on the forum it seems from some posts i seem to be getting will probably appreciate the break from my posts that that will necessitate lol.
(January 8, 2013 at 5:05 pm)apophenia Wrote:Mark 13:13 Wrote:I may be a lot of things but i'm not stupid
I'm not persuaded that you've met the burden of proof with respect to this claim.
lol
