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

  • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

    In my case, it's a matter of using the reasoning ability that we have to explain what we experience.

    Your claim is that the rational could not have come from the non-rational, so the rational must always have existed, which is akin to saying that matter could not have come from non-matter, so matter must always have existed.
    No, my point was that my position is more plausible. And the wild card is a rational, supremely powerful, Creator, nothing would prevent Him from creating. In your case you are sill left with non-rational, non-intelligent, non-conscious forces creating things that are completely foreign to and opposite of their nature. These forces have no intention, direction, or teleology. Where a God would have.
    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

      Of course Christians defend the concept of God.
      Except when they just used the concept of God to explain human rationality. Then they realize that it would be circular reasoning.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by seer View Post

        No, my point was that my position is more plausible. And the wild card is a rational, supremely powerful, Creator, nothing would prevent Him from creating. In your case you are sill left with non-rational, non-intelligent, non-conscious forces creating things that are completely foreign to and opposite of their nature. These forces have no intention, direction, or teleology. Where a God would have.
        Once again, we reach the point where we'll have to agree to disagree. What is more plausible to you is obviously not more plausible to me.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

          Except when they just used the concept of God to explain human rationality. Then they realize that it would be circular reasoning.
          Well no, you just admitted that my syllogism was deductive.
          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

            Once again, we reach the point where we'll have to agree to disagree. What is more plausible to you is obviously not more plausible to me.
            Of course you are an atheist.
            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


            • God is not contingent. I think we can all agree on that. Whether you believe God exists or not, the concept of God carries with it the idea of non-contingency. Take a leap here Stoic and Markus...you know what i'm talking about. You understand at least the theoretical notion that God is self existent and immutable.

              That's the assumption that the theist begins with. And I believe that the theist has creative license to do so as long as his conclusions follow from that premise, regardless of how persuasive it might be to others.

              So the theist begins with the assumption of non-contingency.

              As far as I can tell, the atheist also has the freedom to say that natural selection is non-contingent, or aims at rationality, etc.

              The question is: is natural selection contingent?

              If yes, then any deductive argument presented by the atheist, will be what I am calling contingent deductive.

              The theist's argument would be non-contingent deductive.

              Contingent and Non-contingent Deductive. That my thing. Ima be famous.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Machinist View Post

                Contingent and Non-contingent Deductive. That my thing. Ima be famous.
                The Philosophy departments are going to have their hands full!



                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

                  Well no, you just admitted that my syllogism was deductive.
                  I'm not sure what you think "deductive" means in that context.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Machinist View Post
                    God is not contingent. I think we can all agree on that. Whether you believe God exists or not, the concept of God carries with it the idea of non-contingency. Take a leap here Stoic and Markus...you know what i'm talking about. You understand at least the theoretical notion that God is self existent and immutable.

                    That's the assumption that the theist begins with. And I believe that the theist has creative license to do so as long as his conclusions follow from that premise, regardless of how persuasive it might be to others.
                    That's just it. It might be incredibly persuasive to other theists. Perfect for preaching to the choir.

                    So the theist begins with the assumption of non-contingency.

                    As far as I can tell, the atheist also has the freedom to say that natural selection is non-contingent, or aims at rationality, etc.
                    Different atheists might have different answers. I don't really see anything as non-contingent.

                    The question is: is natural selection contingent?

                    If yes, then any deductive argument presented by the atheist, will be what I am calling contingent deductive.

                    The theist's argument would be non-contingent deductive.

                    Contingent and Non-contingent Deductive. That my thing. Ima be famous.
                    I'd say that's right up there in terms of significance with seer's Deductive Argument for the Reliability of Human Reason.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by seer View Post


                      I have no idea what you mean. Saying that the brain can encompass consciousness tells us nothing about how or why it does or came about. Or how brain chemicals come to know conceptual truths or rational inference. You are begging the question.
                      Consciousness and memory is stored in the neurons and pathways of the brain. This we know and neuroscience is continuing to find out more. There is no coherent energy medium for the functioning of consciousness, intelligence and personality beyond death. They are dependent upon the action of the living brain.
                      He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it. - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seer View Post

                        Well no, you just admitted that my syllogism was deductive.
                        But NOT sound. "A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all of its premises are actually true. In effect, an argument is valid if the truth of the premises logically guarantees the truth of the conclusion.". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.




                        He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it. - Douglas Adams.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by seer View Post

                          That is just silly Tass, these truths are discovered by historical methods and not scientific methods.
                          Historical facts are confirmed by ‘historical critical thinking’ which is linked to the scientific methodology of objective research and accumulation of verifiable facts.

                          We only have any idea that you love your mother because you tell us.
                          No, you have a very good idea that I love my mother because we are predisposed by natural selection as a social species to love and be loyal to our families and community. It is instinctive.

                          A subjective truth (if correct) that is as true as water boiling at 212 F.
                          “IF CORRECT”. How do you know when subjective “truths” are correct?

                          He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it. - Douglas Adams.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                            Consciousness and memory is stored in the neurons and pathways of the brain. This we know and neuroscience is continuing to find out more. There is no coherent energy medium for the functioning of consciousness, intelligence and personality beyond death. They are dependent upon the action of the living brain.
                            I said nothing about anything beyond death, the point is consciousness is not material. And you can hold to your science of the gaps view...
                            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


                            • There is a difference between Validity and Soundness. It is possible for a deductive argument to not be sound, but still be valid

                              Beginning with a Rational God, the argument that was previously presented, is Valid per the rules of logic. The soundness of it, obviously, is going to be a matter of belief.


                              God.jpg​​


                              ​​​​The challenge here in this thread was never to build a sound deductive argument, only a valid one. That challenge has been met. One can deny soundness. Soundness is subjective. It would be a non-starter to even try to build a sound argument for the existence of God. That would be the same as proselytizing. Validity, however, is objective and apparent to all.

                              Does the conclusion follow from the premises? In the theists argument, yes it does. Again, we're not talking about soundness here. The assumptions that I make my initial premise with can be as wild and imaginative as I want and it can still be a valid deductive argument...IF.... the conclusion would necessarily be true, if the premises were true.

                              Yes, we are assuming the rationality, the trustworthiness, the non-contingency...we are assuming the very existence of God as premise#1. It's quite flexible at that stage of construction. Have fun with it and explore the possibilities. The Cosmos is the limit. Just make sure that your conclusion would necessarily be true, if your premises are true.

                              Now I have confirmed that the difference between soundness and validity is an actual rule within the study of logic.

                              The theist is still left with one problem though, and I have yet to understand how to resolve it. I think it could be resolved with more research into logic, but for now it seems like a valid objection. The objection is :


                              The theist began with human reason to even make the assumptions that form his 1st premise, therefore his argument is circular.

                              That does seem circular. I suspect there is a rule here that we do not know about (if you do know, please share), that states when the clock starts (so to speak). Does it really matter just how you got there? The "How you got there part" is not part of the deductive argument. Shouldn't only the contents of the deductive argument be what matters for it to be a Valid Deductive Argument?

                              It seems intuitive to me that there is a rule somewhere that says that only what is inside the argument matters when it's validity is being questioned.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                                Historical facts are confirmed by ‘historical critical thinking’ which is linked to the scientific methodology of objective research and accumulation of verifiable facts.
                                That again, is just stupid Tass. Historical critical thinking is not a scientific method. And again, we had accurate history long, long before the scientific method came about. You are just being disingenuous because you, holding to scientism, need to filter all truths and facts through science. And it can't be done.



                                No, you have a very good idea that I love my mother because we are predisposed by natural selection as a social species to love and be loyal to our families and community. It is instinctive.
                                That is false, I have known men that did not love their mothers, in essence, hated them. One was a life long friend. So prove scientifically that you actually love your mother.


                                “IF CORRECT”. How do you know when subjective “truths” are correct?
                                By experience; drinking your cup of tea the other morning is as much of a fact as the known distance between the earth and the moon. Even is no one else witnessed your drinking it.

                                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 tabibito, 05-12-2022, 10:42 PM
                                36 responses
                                165 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 05-10-2022, 06:04 PM
                                5 responses
                                55 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-02-2022, 09:53 AM
                                70 responses
                                380 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by lee_merrill, 04-24-2022, 06:02 PM
                                138 responses
                                720 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by shunyadragon, 04-20-2022, 12:01 PM
                                223 responses
                                1,288 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X