RE: Actual Infinity in Reality?
February 28, 2018 at 10:03 pm
(This post was last modified: February 28, 2018 at 10:54 pm by GrandizerII.)
(February 28, 2018 at 6:11 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: However this doesn't address the dichotomy paradox by Zeno. It's not about motion, or answering how we get from position 0 to position 1.
The whole point of Zeno's paradoxes is that they are arguments against motion, continuous or discrete.
I love, by the way, how Steve has not responded to my last response or two and is just repeating the same old bullshit that has long been debunked. So much for intellectual honesty.
(February 28, 2018 at 3:32 pm)SteveII Wrote: Since (2) is of the class of axioms that are not self-evident, they are assumptions on which further mathematical equations can be developed (useful in calculus for example). To be clear, this axiom is not reasoned into--it is just assumed as a foundation for the subset of infinite set theory in mathematics. See this earlier post.
This is CLEARLY a question-begging argument and therefore invalid.
That, or you still haven't grasped (or maybe you don't want to grasp) the exact argument we're making. We're not arguing that infinity is logically possible, therefore it is. We're arguing that you haven't provided any good reductio ad absurdum arguments to disprove the logic of actual infinity. You've failed with all the analogies and paradoxes you've posted about thus far.
And even if it was a question-begging argument, which it isn't, it would still be a valid argument anyway. Circular yes, invalid no.
And about the B-theory of time, William Lane Craig himself said the KCA is predicated on the A-theory of time and that if the B-theory of time is true, then the argument is useless. Well, we know which theory of time is backed by the science, and it's not the A-theory of time.
