RE: A Half-Serious Definition of God
December 16, 2021 at 11:38 pm
(This post was last modified: December 16, 2021 at 11:39 pm by The Architect Of Fate.)
(December 16, 2021 at 10:37 pm)polymath257 Wrote:He's advocating whatever benefits his belief in magic. He's an epistemic grifter for theism.(December 16, 2021 at 10:34 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: I'm using a different logic :-P
And here I thought you were an advocate of classical logic.
OK, give your axioms and rules of deduction for the logic you want to use. Make sure you include how to use quantifier logic as well as propositional logic.
In particular, give your rules for defining something prior to showing it exists and is unique.
Make sure I can't just define the Invisible Pink Unicorn to be that which is the greatest possible unicorn that is also pink and invisible. because such a thing would *have* to exist since it is the greatest, right?
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
![[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.shopify.com%2Fs%2Ffiles%2F1%2F0630%2F5310%2F3332%2Fproducts%2FCanada_Flag.jpg%3Fv%3D1646203843)
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
