Posts: 5598
Threads: 112
Joined: July 16, 2012
Reputation:
74
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 2:03 am
(This post was last modified: May 10, 2014 at 2:06 am by Ryantology.)
(May 9, 2014 at 1:38 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Not really. I mean, that can help form a predictive model replete with falsifiability, or to help you interpret the evidence, but you don't ever prove something to be objectively real by applying subjective reason to subjective experience. We're too cognitively impaired and too prone to bias to ever reach the truth using that method exclusively.
The only things that are perfect are God, and his followers' ability to correctly identify and interpret meaning in every single piece of imagery that appears in their heads. Through what can only be divine providence, these always have meanings which coincide perfectly with their preconceived notions and indoctrinated beliefs.
Posts: 1946
Threads: 17
Joined: February 6, 2014
Reputation:
18
Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 3:01 am
Posts: 1152
Threads: 42
Joined: July 8, 2013
Reputation:
23
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 3:22 am
"The reason things will never get better is because people keep electing these rich cocksuckers who don't give a shit about you."
-George Carlin
Posts: 1946
Threads: 17
Joined: February 6, 2014
Reputation:
18
Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 4:38 am
(This post was last modified: May 10, 2014 at 5:17 am by Rampant.A.I..)
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 7:42 am
(This post was last modified: May 10, 2014 at 7:48 am by Chas.)
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 1152
Threads: 42
Joined: July 8, 2013
Reputation:
23
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 9:46 am
(This post was last modified: May 10, 2014 at 9:51 am by MindForgedManacle.)
"The reason things will never get better is because people keep electing these rich cocksuckers who don't give a shit about you."
-George Carlin
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 10:40 am
(May 10, 2014 at 9:46 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote: (May 10, 2014 at 7:42 am)Chas Wrote: The ontological argument is illogical, it is mere wordplay on completely baseless assumptions.
They're not illogical (some are logically valid), but as I'm an atheist, I certainly don't accept them. :p
What part of "He's a Maximally Great Being, which includes necessary existence" is not illogical word play?
No, that argument is stupid in the extreme.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 19
Threads: 0
Joined: May 10, 2014
Reputation:
0
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 10:46 am
(May 9, 2014 at 12:16 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: (May 9, 2014 at 1:34 am)Esquilax Wrote: The latter is the subtext though, as the logical reasons they state ultimately fail, and yet are never retracted. As I've said many times, you can't logic something into existence, and if your whole position attempts to do an end run around demonstrability by just arguing why it's impossible for something to not exist, well then you're probably hiding a more personal reason for why you think this thing should exist. But you can prove something true about existence by applying reason to experience independent of what one hopes to find.
Your psychological speculations about believers do not apply to all. I was an atheist but reluctantly accepted the reality of God when confronted with specific philosophical problems. Just because someone reaches a different conclusion than you does not always mean they must be delutional, weak, or stupid. Maybe they're merely wrong. And just maybe you are wrong.
What philosophical problems? Postulating a God causes more problems than it solves. Where did God come from? Is there more than one? What's the purpose of God? And even if there is a God, who created the universe, what makes you think God wants or need a relationship with you? What makes you think such a God gives a damn about your existence or pays any attention to what you think or do?
By the way reality is reality - so what's with the 'reluctantly' accepting the reality of God? Philosophical musings/problems do not generate a reality! I can think and imagine many things, but they do not become a reality because I think of them.
Posts: 1152
Threads: 42
Joined: July 8, 2013
Reputation:
23
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 11:51 am
(May 10, 2014 at 10:40 am)Chas Wrote: (May 10, 2014 at 9:46 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote: They're not illogical (some are logically valid), but as I'm an atheist, I certainly don't accept them. :p
What part of "He's a Maximally Great Being, which includes necessary existence" is not illogical word play?
No, that argument is stupid in the extreme.
The part where it just follows from Robert Maydoyle'd Modal Perfection Argument that necessary existence is a great-making property. And since Maydoyle's argument - which is generally used to supplement the 1st premise of Plantinga's ontological argument - is logically valid, it's definitely not illogical.
"The reason things will never get better is because people keep electing these rich cocksuckers who don't give a shit about you."
-George Carlin
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Necessity is not evidence
May 10, 2014 at 9:58 pm
(May 10, 2014 at 11:51 am)MindForgedManacle Wrote: (May 10, 2014 at 10:40 am)Chas Wrote: What part of "He's a Maximally Great Being, which includes necessary existence" is not illogical word play?
No, that argument is stupid in the extreme.
The part where it just follows from Robert Maydoyle'd Modal Perfection Argument that necessary existence is a great-making property. And since Maydoyle's argument - which is generally used to supplement the 1st premise of Plantinga's ontological argument - is logically valid, it's definitely not illogical.
Except that it is not valid.
"Premise 3: If the MGB exists in some possible world, then the MGB exists in all possible worlds"
This is an invalid flip from 'there exists' to 'for all'. Logic fail.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
|
