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

The Argument From Reason...

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

  • The Argument From Reason...

    And I quote:

    1. If Naturalism is true, then no event can cause another event due to its propositional content.

    2. But some events do cause other events due to propositional content (i,e.logical inference).

    3. Therefore naturalism is false.
    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

  • #2
    no takers?
    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


    • #3
      Originally posted by seer View Post
      no takers?
      What does it mean for an event to cause another event due to its propositional content?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Stoic View Post

        What does it mean for an event to cause another event due to its propositional content?
        A simple example would be reasoning to take a certain course of action, then acting on it - like the figuring out (propositional content) the best route to travel to a specific destination.

        Or propositional content leading to true conclusions (rational inference).

        1. All dogs are mortal.
        2. Spot is a dog.
        3.Therefore spot is mortal.
        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


        • #5
          Originally posted by seer View Post
          A simple example would be reasoning to take a certain course of action, then acting on it - like the figuring out (propositional content) the best route to travel to a specific destination.
          Like, for example, by reading a map?

          That would produce, from your first premise:

          "1. If Naturalism is true, then no event can cause another event due to its propositional content."
          2. Reading a map is an event that can cause another event due to its propositional content.
          3. Therefore if naturalism is true, no-one can read maps.

          If #3 is false - and it certainly appears to be false - then your first premise is also false.

          (At this point I expect you to try to shift the burden of proof).
          Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

          mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

          Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
          Mountain Man on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

          Sparko: Even the deists like Jefferson believed in the Christian God, ...

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Roy View Post
            Like, for example, by reading a map?

            That would produce, from your first premise:

            "1. If Naturalism is true, then no event can cause another event due to its propositional content."
            2. Reading a map is an event that can cause another event due to its propositional content.
            3. Therefore if naturalism is true, no-one can read maps.

            If #3 is false - and it certainly appears to be false - then your first premise is also false.

            (At this point I expect you to try to shift the burden of proof).
            Of course, if naturalism is true - no one could read a map. What do chemicals, biology and the laws of nature know of propositions? That is your burden...
            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


            • #7
              Originally posted by seer View Post

              Of course, if naturalism is true - no one could read a map. What do chemicals, biology and the laws of nature know of propositions? That is your burden...
              I think it's your burden to show the first premise of your argument is true.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                I think it's your burden to show the first premise of your argument is true.
                Well no, that is the whole point. You would have to show how it is possible for chemicals, biology functions and the laws of nature to know of propositions. These functions are self-evidently not truth aiming or aware of propositional ideals - nor of rational inference. So my first premise stands until you can offer a genuine defeater.
                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


                • #9
                  Originally posted by seer View Post

                  Well no, that is the whole point. You would have to show how it is possible for chemicals, biology functions and the laws of nature to know of propositions. These functions are self-evidently not truth aiming or aware of propositional ideals - nor of rational inference. So my first premise stands until you can offer a genuine defeater.
                  Sorry, I don't share your incredulity.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                    Sorry, I don't share your incredulity.
                    If you put brain chemicals under a microscope do you find logical inference, propositions, ideals, consciousness? Will you ever? Pointing to incredulity solves nothing. I think it is obvious that some from of dualism where the immaterial mental states supervene on or direct physical actions, like in my OP must be the case.
                    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


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by seer View Post

                      If you put brain chemicals under a microscope do you find logical inference, propositions, ideals, consciousness? Will you ever? Pointing to incredulity solves nothing. I think it is obvious that some from of dualism where the immaterial mental states supervene on or direct physical actions, like in my OP must be the case.
                      If you put a hard drive under a microscope, do you find videos, songs, and photographs?

                      What's obvious to you isn't necessarily correct.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                        If you put a hard drive under a microscope, do you find videos, songs, and photographs?

                        What's obvious to you isn't necessarily correct.
                        No you find meaningless electrical impulses. Just like our meaningless electro-chemical impulses. Until they are translated, made rational. What translated for the computer? What translates for the human mind? And I would remind you that computers are only rational because they are an extension of our rationality. Rationality produced rationality. In the case of materialism you are still left with the non-rational producing the rational. I think your point works in favor of my position.
                        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


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by seer View Post

                          No you find meaningless electrical impulses. Just like our meaningless electro-chemical impulses. Until they are translated, made rational. What translated for the computer? What translates for the human mind? And I would remind you that computers are only rational because they are an extension of our rationality. Rationality produced rationality. In the case of materialism you are still left with the non-rational producing the rational. I think your point works in favor of my position.
                          Your argument would have been much more convincing before Darwin came along.

                          I expect that's why there were so many deists back then.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                            Your argument would have been much more convincing before Darwin came along.

                            I expect that's why there were so many deists back then.

                            “But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?
                            [To William Graham 3 July 1881]”
                            Charles Darwin

                            And if you think science is any closer to explaining human consciousness than it was 150 years ago you are fooling yourself. It is actually getting worse.
                            Last edited by seer; 10-11-2021, 01:32 PM.
                            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


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by seer View Post


                              “But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?
                              [To William Graham 3 July 1881]”
                              Charles Darwin

                              And if you think science is any closer to explaining human consciousness than it was 150 years ago you are fooling yourself. It is actually getting worse.
                              I prefer a more complete version of Darwin's quote:

                              "Nevertheless you have expressed my inward conviction, though far more vividly and clearly than I could have done that the Universe is not the result of chance. But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" (emphasis mine)

                              It's pretty obvious that what Darwin was doubting was his conviction that the universe is not the result of chance.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 11-27-2021, 06:29 AM
                              31 responses
                              204 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by Cow Poke, 11-01-2021, 08:51 PM
                              68 responses
                              354 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by Ronson, 10-31-2021, 10:01 AM
                              7 responses
                              61 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by eider, 10-24-2021, 01:23 AM
                              356 responses
                              1,874 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post DesertBerean  
                              Started by seer, 10-11-2021, 07:32 PM
                              460 responses
                              2,861 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post tabibito  
                              Working...
                              X