Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Logic, Therefore God...

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

  • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

    I see that humans make illogical statements, but no one cares about that but us humans.
    Exactly!
    'No one cares but us humans.'
    That speaks up strongly in the context of either 'No Gods to hear' or 'No Gods that care'.
    That can fit for either of our opinions.

    Deism is a step towards atheism in as much as both opinions dismiss the idea of 'Theism'.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by eider View Post

      Deism is a step towards atheism in as much as both opinions dismiss the idea of 'Theism'.
      This is interesting. What's the point with stopping at deism?

      Comment


      • Regarding the thread subject, I have been reading the link that Seer provided earlier :http://steve-patterson.com/resolving-the-liars-paradox/.

        It may be a good exercise to read and meditate on this, because I think this could be getting close to the problem of miscommunication between theists and atheists. Would it be possible for the logicians on this thread to agree on the assumption that there is a world that exists beyond linguistic errors?

        These linguistic errors are really interesting and neat. I like them. They're very entertaining. But why does the atheist assume that the flexible and fun logic that the mind has the capacity to create and be very fluid with, somehow reflect the real world that is beyond thought? I call that the irreducible world. It is the laws and properties of this world that we are speaking of, not the world of the creative logical puzzles that the mind loves to play with.

        What is being proposed here is that the laws of this world, the irreducible world, are threefold: the law of non-contradiction, of excluded middle, and of identity, and that these 3 laws are absolute and unchanging. If they are not absolute in the real world, then there's a huge problem.

        Just a quick observation here, but why do we make this 3 fold( the 3 fundamental laws of thought) and not One? Doesn't each of the three imply the other two?

        Anyway, slice and dice it any way it's convenient, there is a reality that exists beyond the semantic web. And I doubt very seriously that anyone is ever going to be able to prove that the laws of said reality are absolute. It is universally self evident that they are. No proof is available it seems for self evident truths. The self evident truth is the proof.











        Comment


        • Originally posted by Machinist View Post

          This is interesting. What's the point with stopping at deism?
          Good question..... Although many atheists focus upon 'no gods' some do recognise the 'no involvement ' which is a Deist position.
          And so maybe would-be deists do keep moving towards atheism, after all, how many deists are there?
          But I do see reason in 'God is all' and 'all is part of God'. But the 'All' is so vast, and any one galaxy so tiny by comparison.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Machinist View Post

            Are we talking about the same thing? The laws of nature vs. the laws of reality?
            Not necessarily. When you talk about laws and properties of the world that exists beyond our minds, to me that means the laws of nature. The term "laws of reality" doesn't seem to have any agreed upon meaning.

            You said in your other post, "What is being proposed here is that the laws of this world, the irreducible world, are threefold: the law of non-contradiction, of excluded middle, and of identity, and that these 3 laws are absolute and unchanging. If they are not absolute in the real world, then there's a huge problem."

            What you call "the laws of this world" are generally referred to as the laws of thought. My view of those laws is the same as the conclusion of the article just linked:

            "The results of modern mathematical logic have deprived the laws of thought of their privileged status as the supreme principles of all logical truths. But since these results do not imply that there is only one true logic, the choice between classical elementary logic, intuitionist logic, and perhaps some other logical theories still depends, at least at the present time, on extralogical, philosophical arguments."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by eider View Post
              Easy......... all is a part of the whole. (Logical)
              The whole is, itself, God. (a belief)


              Everything physical.... and anything else....... and you mentioned 'universe'; the universe could be minute in comparison to all.

              You did not answer the question, Please define you god. Are you just calling the physical universe god? If not what are its attributes,other than physical?
              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 Stoic View Post

                Casually disregarding the LONC would undermine rationality, given how much we have come to accept it and depend on it, despite its lack of absoluteness....
                As far as I'm concerned not accepting its absoluteness undermines all rationality. That is why I kept harping on limiting principles. Every claim or statement is now suspect - how could we rationality know otherwise? We can't.
                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

                  As far as I'm concerned not accepting its absoluteness undermines all rationality. That is why I kept harping on limiting principles. Every claim or statement is now suspect - how could we rationality know otherwise? We can't.
                  For those of us who don't think absolute certainty about the world is ever rationally justified, this isn't really much of a problem.

                  For those of you who can't live without absolute certainty, the solution is simple. Just go on being absolutely certain.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                    For those of us who don't think absolute certainty about the world is ever rationally justified, this isn't really much of a problem.
                    Is that true or false or both?

                    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 Stoic View Post


                      "The results of modern mathematical logic have deprived the laws of thought of their privileged status as the supreme principles of all logical truths. But since these results do not imply that there is only one true logic, the choice between classical elementary logic, intuitionist logic, and perhaps some other logical theories still depends, at least at the present time, on extralogical, philosophical arguments."
                      Why do you think that modern mathematical logic is reflective of the irreducible world (or ultimate reality?) Or that it somehow undermines the laws of thought as the supreme principles of all logical truth?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seer View Post
                        Is that true or false or both?
                        Pretty sure it's true.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Machinist View Post
                          Why do you think that modern mathematical logic is reflective of the irreducible world (or ultimate reality?)
                          I don't really know that it is. But I don't know that the "laws of thought" are, either.

                          Or that it somehow undermines the laws of thought as the supreme principles of all logical truth?
                          Well, it shows that the laws of thought are not sufficient in themselves, and that they are to at least some extent optional.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by seer View Post


                            You did not answer the question, Please define you god. Are you just calling the physical universe god? If not what are its attributes,other than physical?
                            Oh.... I answered the question. You just didn't comprehend the simplicity within the answer.

                            'Define God'......... Everything, force, and anything else is a part of God.
                            'What other attributes does God have?'........ ...You just read 'anything else' in the above definition.

                            QUESTIONS:-
                            What is your definition of God?
                            What other attributes does God have?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Stoic View Post
                              I don't really know that it is. But I don't know that the "laws of thought" are, either.
                              This seems like an extreme form of agnosticism.

                              Originally posted by Stoic View Post
                              Well, it shows that the laws of thought are not sufficient in themselves, and that they are to at least some extent optional.
                              It does seem that entire worlds can be built from logic. I'm just sitting here reading through this :https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/possible-worlds/

                              Most of it is way over my head, but I get the impression that it's a beautiful art.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                                Pretty sure it's true.
                                But you don't know nor can you claim that it is so...
                                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 Juvenal, 10-13-2021, 08:41 AM
                                19 responses
                                113 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mossrose  
                                Started by seer, 10-11-2021, 06:32 PM
                                9 responses
                                78 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Machinist  
                                Started by lee_merrill, 10-08-2021, 06:03 PM
                                5 responses
                                46 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by seer, 10-06-2021, 05:21 PM
                                44 responses
                                252 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Started by System199176, 10-06-2021, 09:36 AM
                                21 responses
                                225 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X