Originally posted by carpedm9587
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Same Sex Marriages, Florists, and Bakers
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by seer; 06-19-2019, 09:29 AM.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
-
I left this thread way back on page 1. I decided to stop in and see how it was going.
I see it has devolved into the standard seer/carp discussion about morality. Why do you guys bother? You keep going over the same arguments over and over and basically ruin every thread. This one is Carp's so it's no skin off my nose. Carry on.
Leaving again...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostI left this thread way back on page 1. I decided to stop in and see how it was going.
I see it has devolved into the standard seer/carp discussion about morality. Why do you guys bother? You keep going over the same arguments over and over and basically ruin every thread. This one is Carp's so it's no skin off my nose. Carry on.
Leaving again...Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostCarp I said: Well how do you know logical concepts exist or work without first using them? Then you said: You don't. That's pretty much the point (that is circular).
Originally posted by seer View PostAnd you said these principles cannot be proven without circularity. That was in reference to the very principles of reason we were speaking of. And then Carp, tell me how we decide what is actually self-evident without begging the question?The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostActually Carp, no, this is not about morality per se, but the laws of logic! That should give us about a year of debate...The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by Zymologist View PostI think carpe and seer should meet IRL again, so they can cage-fight and videotape it for our viewing pleasure.
The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostNo. The principles are accepted as self-evident, for the reasons cited. That is affirmed/supported by the observation, upon making that acceptance, that they work and can predict outcomes. I actually missed the "exist and" part of your post and was focused on the work. We know they exist because our brains cannot grasp them not existing - hence "self-evident." "Self-evident" is not circular, AFAIK. It is merely an acknowledgement that there is no logical way to derive proofs for these without getting caught in circularity and that they are simply accepted as true on the face of it. We know they work by using them and noting that they accurately predict outcomes.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostSo do you agree that you need to use the principles of reason to decide if the principles of reason are self-evident?
Originally posted by seer View PostIf you say no, then tell us how one decide that the principles of reason are self-evident without using the principles of reason to decide?
Originally posted by seer View PostIn other words the standard that you are using to decide what is self-evident is not self-evident itself.
Again, if you think that is not the reality - then offer an argument to defend their existence, absoluteness, and universality WITHOUT using the principles of logic, which would have you arguing in a circle. That is what you have been doing and either a) refuse to acknowledge, or b) don't understand the principles you are trying to use. I cannot see any other possibility.Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-19-2019, 12:23 PM.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostThey are "self-evident." They our concepts our brains/minds cannot grasp as being untrue. They cannot be logically defended - only "grasped." If you think otherwise, by all means make your case.
Any articulation of a "standard" gets you caught in circularity. There is no such argument that can be made for the foundational concepts of logic (identity, non-contradiction, excluded middle). The basic logical concepts cannot be defended with logic without getting caught in circularity. They can only be recognized/grasped as true - intuitively, if you will.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostCarp, show me exactly where I made a circular argument:
How is arguing from a rational God to logical absolutes circular? Because I never understood your point, since you already agreed that my syllogism was sound. Be specific please and don't hand wave...The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostSo how do you decide what your mind cannot grasp as being untrue without applying the principles of reason?
Originally posted by seer View PostBut you just applied a standard - that which the mind cannot grasp as being untrue. A standard that is not itself self-evident.Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-19-2019, 12:36 PM.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostThe best I can give you is that this is intuited. It is recognized by the mind.
That we cannot conceive as being untrue - that they work - that they predicts outcomes are all post-factum evidence that our intuition was likely correct. They don't prove anything - they just provide evidence that reassures us "we're on the right track." The beginning place is the logical principles themselves, for which no logical argument can be framed without engaging in circularity.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostCarp you said: Any articulation of a "standard" gets you caught in circularity. But you have to in fact articulate a standard to decide what qualifies as self-evident or not as you did: that which the mind cannot grasp as being untrue. You can not escape circularity. Never mind that your standard "that which the mind cannot grasp as being untrue" is not itself a self evident truth.
In other words, if you ask me to explain why I think the basics are true, I will point to those factors as evidence that convinces me that they are true. If these explanations constitute a "standard" to you, then so be it. If you ask me to prove they are true rigorously and logically, I will tell you, "it's not possible," because of the problem of circularity. This is the primary distinction between us. I recognize that any logically constructed argument about the basic logical laws is necessarily circular. You seem to not be able to grasp this, and insist yours is not.
To that end, I notice you didn't answer my other post. Perhaps you didn't see it? It is post #250.Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-20-2019, 08:18 AM.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostThis has been responded to. As you noted with your Buddhist link, the mind "not conceiving of it being untrue" is not a logical proof. It is a piece of evidence we interpret in that fashion. We look around for any tidbit that will affirm our observation. The function of the brain, predictability, consensus, and a variety of factors all contribute to that sense of "I got it right." None of them "proves" anything or can be used in a logical argument to affirm the truth of the logical basics exactly because it gets you caught up in circularity.
In other words, if you ask me to explain why I think the basics are true, I will point to those factors as evidence that convinces me that they are true. If these explanations constitute a "standard" to you, then so be it. If you ask me to prove they are true rigorously and logically, I will tell you, "it's not possible," because of the problem of circularity. This is the primary distinction between us. I recognize that any logically constructed argument about the basic logical laws is necessarily circular. You seem to not be able to grasp this, and insist yours is not.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI just thought of a way that I might be able to help you see your circularity. Look at your argument, Seer. I have accepted the validity of the argument multiple times (setting aside my swapping the terms "valid" and "sound"). I have accepted the validity on the basis that the argument conforms to logical principles. Tell me, Seer, can you determine if this is argument is valid if the laws of logic are NOT absolute and universal?Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 04:17 PM
|
1 response
13 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 10:10 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 04:11 PM
|
2 responses
17 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 08:26 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 03:10 PM
|
3 responses
20 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 09:38 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 02:57 PM
|
0 responses
12 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 02:59 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 02:48 PM
|
4 responses
34 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 08:28 PM
|
Comment