// Required code

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.
See more
See less

Same Sex Marriages, Florists, and Bakers

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BTW Carp, I started a new thread here: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...or-Rationality
    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 Post
      Since you can not decide what is self-evident without circular reasoning one wonders why you brought this whole self-evident thing up in the first place.
      Because it is how the logical universal/absolutes are accepted - not through logical reasoning (except anecdotally post-factum), but intuitively. As soon as one tries to explain that "intution," one gets caught up in trying to make an argument, and circularity rears its head. No logical argument is possible.

      Originally posted by seer View Post
      I already said I assumed that the laws of logical were universal, and of course said laws are absolute since they are a reflection of God's immutable rational nature.
      And you STILL have not answered the question. The question is not about what you believe or do not believe. It is specifically about your argument: Yes or no, Seer - can your argument be shown to be valid if the basic laws of logic are not absolute/universal?

      Originally posted by seer View Post
      And how can you honestly dismiss circular reasoning since that is the basis for your self-evident truths, or even for knowing reality in the first place (as we discussed in the past).
      THAT is your mistake. We are the same in that we both accept the logical absolutes/universals AS absolute and universal. We are different in that I know I cannot frame a logical argument to defend that position and you are under the mistaken impression that you can. Then you make a second mistake by proposing premises to this argument that you cannot show to be true, rendering the soundness of your argument undetermined.

      You are piling vapor on top of vapor, thinking you are actually saying something and proving that "god is the source of logical absolutes/universals. That you do not see it is truly amazing.
      Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-21-2019, 10:48 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 seer View Post
        BTW Carp, I started a new thread here: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...or-Rationality
        No thanks. We've been through this many times. An entire thread just to have you dodge more questions is not going to help. Perhaps, if you actually answer the question as asked, I'll consider heading over there. Otherwise, I'll leave the game to you.


        ETA: BTW, that's pretty much the thread I suggested you start weeks ago, when the kerfuffle about the threads I had started was in full swing. You declined to create it then. I'm curious to know what changed that led you to create it now?
        Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-21-2019, 11:02 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 Post
          Because it is how the logical universal/absolutes are accepted - not through logical reasoning (except anecdotally post-factum), but intuitively. As soon as one tries to explain that "intution," one gets caught up in trying to make an argument, and circularity rears its head. No logical argument is possible.
          That is false Carp, how one decides what is self-evident is based first on reasoning. As you said, what the mind can not conceive as be otherwise, or contradictory, etc... In other words one needs standards and reasoning. Not intuition.


          And you STILL have not answered the question. The question is not about what you believe or do not believe. It is specifically about your argument: Yes or no, Seer - can your argument be shown to be valid if the basic laws of logic are not absolute/universal?
          Of course the laws of logic have to be absolute to make the argument. So what it your point? That does not account for said laws.


          THAT is your mistake. We are the same in that we both accept the logical absolutes/universals AS absolute and universal. We are different in that I know I cannot frame a logical argument to defend that position and you are under the mistaken impression that you can.
          Tell me Carp, why wouldn't God account for or be the source of logical absolutes? Where is the problem?
          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 Post
            That is false Carp, how one decides what is self-evident is based first on reasoning. As you said, what the mind can not conceive as be otherwise, or contradictory, etc... In other words one needs standards and reasoning. Not intuition.
            And any application of "reasoning" gets you caught in a circle, as noted.

            Originally posted by seer View Post
            Of course the laws of logic have to be absolute to make the argument. So what it your point? That does not account for said laws.
            If the laws have to be absolute/universal in order to make the argument, and the conclusion of the argument is "therefore absolute logical concepts are universal," then you have assumed your conclusion in order to make your argument. It is circular, despite your repeated insistence that it is not. A circular argument does not prove anything.

            Originally posted by seer View Post
            Tell me Carp, why wouldn't God account for or be the source of logical absolutes? Where is the problem?
            I didn't say "couldn't" for the same reason I don't say "is." I said "your argument shows nothing." Many people seem to have a difficulty distinguishing between "your argument does not successfully show what it claims to show" and "your argument is wrong." The two statements are not equivalent.

            Your argument requires its conclusion to be true just to be able to frame the argument. It employs premises whose truth value you cannot determine. The first renders the argument circular. The latter renders the soundness of the argument indeterminate. The result: your argument achieves nothing logically. I don't know your motivation for putting it forward - but the entire thing is pointless.
            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 Post
              And any application of "reasoning" gets you caught in a circle, as noted.
              The question is why do you accept such circularity when it comes to "self-evident" truths, which are not so self-evident without preceding reasoning.


              If the laws have to be absolute/universal in order to make the argument, and the conclusion of the argument is "therefore absolute logical concepts are universal," then you have assumed your conclusion in order to make your argument. It is circular, despite your repeated insistence that it is not. A circular argument does not prove anything.
              So your argument for what is self-evident does not prove anything. Good to know.

              Your argument requires its conclusion to be true just to be able to frame the argument. It employs premises whose truth value you cannot determine. The first renders the argument circular. The latter renders the soundness of the argument indeterminate. The result: your argument achieves nothing logically. I don't know your motivation for putting it forward - but the entire thing is pointless.
              Then in your world all rationality is pointless. You can not account for the laws of logic, self-evident truths, your own experience of reality - all these justifications end in circular arguments and according to you pointless.
              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 Post
                The question is why do you accept such circularity when it comes to "self-evident" truths, which are not so self-evident without preceding reasoning.
                Because there is no alternative.

                Originally posted by seer View Post
                So your argument for what is self-evident does not prove anything. Good to know.
                Correct. It doesn't. That's the position we are ALL in. Likewise, your argument about god as the source of logical concepts doesn't prove anything. That's pretty much the point. We are all hoist on the same petard.

                Originally posted by seer View Post
                Then in your world all rationality is pointless.
                No.

                Originally posted by seer View Post
                You can not account for the laws of logic, self-evident truths, your own experience of reality - all these justifications end in circular arguments and according to you pointless.
                ...unless you simply accept the inevitable, which we all do. You too accept "universal/absolute logical concepts exist." Like me - you cannot rationally defend the position without getting caught in a circle. We all have to accept the fact of logical absolute/universals as a starting point for any rational discussion. We don't have have to accept the source of these concepts on the basis of circularity. The source of them doesn't change the fact of them.

                I accept the fact of them without going further. You are further trying to squeeze "therefore I know the source" from your argument with absolutely no justification.
                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 Post
                  Because there is no alternative.


                  Correct. It doesn't. That's the position we are ALL in. Likewise, your argument about god as the source of logical concepts doesn't prove anything. That's pretty much the point. We are all hoist on the same petard.


                  No.



                  ...unless you simply accept the inevitable, which we all do. You too accept "universal/absolute logical concepts exist." Like me - you cannot rationally defend the position without getting caught in a circle. We all have to accept the fact of logical absolute/universals as a starting point for any rational discussion. We don't have have to accept the source of these concepts on the basis of circularity. The source of them doesn't change the fact of them.

                  I accept the fact of them without going further. You are further trying to squeeze "therefore I know the source" from your argument with absolutely no justification.
                  How can you say no when nothing is reached without circular reasoning? And that circular reasoning is pointless. You have no logical justification for anything...
                  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 Post
                    How can you say no when nothing is reached without circular reasoning? And that circular reasoning is pointless. You have no logical justification for anything...
                    Read the last part of the post.


                    Meanwhile, you are making an argument that destroys you along with me. As has been shown, there is no way to logically affirm the existence and nature of logical concepts without engaging in circularity. This is true for all of us. Even your argument has been shown to be circular. That leaves us with two possibilities:

                    1) We accept this inescapable reality, assume the truth of core logical concepts and proceed from there.
                    2) We reject all reason as "irrational" because the three core principles cannot be logically arrived at without circularity.

                    If you want to go for 2), knock yourself out. In that case, we should stop having logical discussions because they are pointless. I tend to 1), largely for somewhat obvious practical reasons.
                    Last edited by carpedm9587; 06-21-2019, 12:55 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 Post
                      It sticks in my craw
                      I'm going to copyright that word so you'll have to pay royalties every time you use it in a sentence.

                      ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                        I'm going to copyright that word so you'll have to pay royalties every time you use it in a sentence.

                        Now THERE's an idea.
                        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 Post
                          Read the last part of the post.


                          Meanwhile, you are making an argument that destroys you along with me. As has been shown, there is no way to logically affirm the existence and nature of logical concepts without engaging in circularity. This is true for all of us. Even your argument has been shown to be circular. That leaves us with two possibilities:

                          1) We accept this inescapable reality, assume the truth of core logical concepts and proceed from there.
                          2) We reject all reason as "irrational" because the three core principles cannot be logically arrived at without circularity.

                          If you want to go for 2), knock yourself out. In that case, we should stop having logical discussions because they are pointless. I tend to 1), largely for somewhat obvious practical reasons.
                          Then you are in fact accepting circular reasoning as valid. There is no knowledge that comes apart from circularity. You can not even assume "the truth of core logical concepts" with out 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 Post
                            Then you are in fact accepting circular reasoning as valid.
                            No.

                            Originally posted by seer View Post
                            There is no knowledge that comes apart from circularity.
                            There is no knowledge that comes apart from the basic logical principles, which we accept as true prima facie. We do not defend them as true logically, because that involves circularity.

                            Originally posted by seer View Post
                            You can not even assume "the truth of core logical concepts" with out circularity.
                            Correct.
                            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 Post

                              There is no knowledge that comes apart from the basic logical principles, which we accept as true prima facie.
                              How do you decide what is true prima facie with out being circular?
                              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 Post
                                How do you decide what is true prima facie with out being circular?
                                Seer, prima facie means essentially "on the face of it." We don't do it often. We do it when we have no choice. The basic rules of logic are an example. We simply accept them as true - as a starting point. The minute you ask me to explain WHY I accept them as true, you are asking me to give you logical reasons for accepting them as such. I have to use the principles of logic to give you that explanation, which gets us right back into circularity.

                                In this case, if I do NOT accept these principles as prima facie true, I am dead in the water. There is nothing I can do or say about anything. And even THAT explanation is circular.

                                You have the same problem. All of these questions could be asked of you - and you have no choice but to make the same answers. Except that you add "and I know where they come from" with no basis for that claim.
                                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

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seanD, Yesterday, 07:54 PM
                                5 responses
                                66 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 09-29-2020, 02:32 PM
                                125 responses
                                859 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Juvenal, 09-29-2020, 09:54 AM
                                14 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by seer, 09-29-2020, 09:50 AM
                                45 responses
                                375 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post firstfloor  
                                Started by seer, 09-28-2020, 05:35 PM
                                31 responses
                                249 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mikewhitney  
                                Working...
                                X