Did God create logic? Or is logic further evidence of God�s existence?

[shunyadragon]

But that is not what he said, he did not commit that particular fallacy. Black swans exist, that is an absolute truth, it is universally true, and absolutely true for God too. He did not argue that all swans are black from the example of one black swan. That is the fallacy - not what Sparko did. You really don't understand any of this do you Shuny?

The actual existence of black and white swans is not the issue. It is a description of a fallacy. Yes drawing a conclusion of the absolute nature of truth from a few examples is clearly an example of the fallacy. The fallacy is also called the 'cherry picking fallacy', but we are not picking cherries. Both Sparko and you are concluding the 'absolute truth' of the law of non-contradiction from the human perspective from a few mundane examples, and that is logical fallacy big time.

[seer]

The actual existence of black and white swans is not the issue. It is a description of a fallacy. Yes drawing a conclusion of the absolute nature of truth from a few examples is clearly an example of the fallacy. The fallacy is also called the 'cherry picking fallacy'

That was not the point, the fallacy was one of an inductive argument, Sparko did not make an inductive argument. But black swans do actually exist, that is an absolute truth, for us, for God and universally. And I'm not cherry picking, I'm giving you a clear example. Would you like to argue that black swans don't exist?

[Sparko]

The actual existence of black and white swans is not the issue. It is a description of a fallacy. Yes drawing a conclusion of the absolute nature of truth from a few examples is clearly an example of the fallacy. The fallacy is also called the 'cherry picking fallacy', but we are not picking cherries. Both Sparko and you are concluding the 'absolute truth' of the law of non-contradiction from the human perspective from a few mundane examples, and that is logical fallacy big time.

basically you have it completely backwards. I have been claiming that there are black swans, and you have been saying "There is most definitely ultimately black swans, but humans are not capable of this knowledge as far as a I know." and then I show you a picture of a black swan and you merely repeat yourself.

Except 'black swans' are 'absolute truth'. I have shown you evidence of absolute truth that humans can understand, and instead of admitting it, you merely repeat your nonsense "There is most definitely ultimately absolute truth, but humans are not capable of this knowledge as far as a I know."

This is why I am saying you are insane. nuts. cuckoo.

[shunyadragon]

basically you have it completely backwards. I have been claiming that there are black swans, and you have been saying "There is most definitely ultimately black swans, but humans are not capable of this knowledge as far as a I know." and then I show you a picture of a black swan and you merely repeat yourself.

Except 'black swans' are 'absolute truth'. I have shown you evidence of absolute truth that humans can understand, and instead of admitting it, you merely repeat your nonsense "There is most definitely ultimately absolute truth, but humans are not capable of this knowledge as far as a I know."

This is why I am saying you are insane. nuts. cuckoo.

False you have not demonstrated you have found 'absolute truth.' You have only shown non-contradiction white swans in the fallible world of humanity. The black swans in this fallacy are where contradictions of logic exist in the fallible human world. You apparently do not understand the logical fallacy.

[Sparko]

False you have not demonstrated you have found 'absolute truth.' You have only shown non-contradiction white swans in the fallible world of humanity. The black swans in this fallacy are where contradictions of logic exist in the fallible human world. You apparently do not understand the logical fallacy.

It is absolutely true that you posted the above words. That is an absolute truth. In no way is it false. It has nothing to do with "non-contradiction" except that I cannot also claim it is true that you did not post the above words because of the law of non-contradiction. Only one of those statements can be absolutely true.

And as a human being, you should be able to understand that. Everyone else reading this thread can. So if you don't understand, that only means you are stupid. Not that there is no absolute truth that humans can understand.

IF I said, "there is no absolute truth" - then that would be equivalent to me saying there are no black swans, and you would be right in saying that is a fallacy because I would have to show every truth statement and prove they are all wrong. Instead I claimed that there IS an absolute truth statement (black swans) and then proceeded to show you evidence of such.

Please, take your meds.

[seer]

False you have not demonstrated you have found 'absolute truth.' You have only shown non-contradiction white swans in the fallible world of humanity. The black swans in this fallacy are where contradictions of logic exist in the fallible human world. You apparently do not understand the logical fallacy.

Define absolute truth Shuny. And how the fact that black swans exist is not an absolute truth.

[shunyadragon]

Define absolute truth Shuny. And how the fact that black swans exist is not an absolute truth.

The fallacy of the white swan/black swan is a 'cherry picking fallacy. The black swan in this fallacy are the possibility of contradictions in the human view of logic. You have a very poor grasp of elemental fallacies.

Source: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=absolute+truth

Absolute truth - "Absolute" is contrasted with "relative." To speak of truth as "absolute" is to say that something is true absolutely, or not relative to something else. By that we might mean true unconditionally, "no matter what."

© Copyright Original Source

Source: http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/absolute-truth.htm

Absolute Truth - Inflexible Reality

"Absolute truth" is defined as inflexible reality: fixed, invariable, unalterable facts. For example, it is a fixed, invariable, unalterable fact that there are absolutely no square circles and there are absolutely no round squares.

© Copyright Original Source

[JimL]

The "qualifications" you are referencing are built INTO the law of non-contradiction itself, so it is in fact, absolutely true without exception. "A can not be A and Not-A at the same time and in the same sense"

And if god doesn't exist, then A could still not be A and not-A at the same time. Or are you, seer, and bones, arguing that if god didn't exist, then A could be A and not-A at the same time?

[shunyadragon]

That was not the point, the fallacy was one of an inductive argument, Sparko did not make an inductive argument. But black swans do actually exist, that is an absolute truth, for us, for God and universally. And I'm not cherry picking, I'm giving you a clear example. Would you like to argue that black swans don't exist?

The problem is the claim of 'universal generalization' of the claim of absolute truth.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

Falsifiability or refutability of a statement, hypothesis, or theory is the inherent possibility that it can be proven false. A statement is called falsifiable if it is possible to conceive of an observation or an argument which negates the statement in question. In this sense, falsify is synonymous with nullify, meaning to invalidate or "show to be false".

For example, by the problem of induction, no number of confirming observations can verify a universal generalization, such as All swans are white, since it is logically possible to falsify it by observing a single black swan. Thus, the term falsifiability is sometimes synonymous to testability. Some statements, such as It will be raining here in one million years, are falsifiable in principle, but not in practice.

© Copyright Original Source

Logician bones, Sparko and you are claiming a universal generalization in absolute truth and the absolute view of the law of non-contradiction, which is the fallacy.

In science the quest is not 'universal generalization,' but a process of falsification that considers estability and does not consider anything absolutely true.

[JimL]

Let's try it this way, a definition:



Are you saying that God's definition is different than ours?

You seer, are assuming that the nature of reality has to do with God. So let me pose the same question to you that I posed to Sparko. If god did not exist, could A then be both A and not-A at the same time?

[seer]

The fallacy of the white swan/black swan is a 'cherry picking fallacy. The black swan in this fallacy are the possibility of contradictions in the human view of logic. You have a very poor grasp of elemental fallacies.

Source: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=absolute+truth

Absolute truth - "Absolute" is contrasted with "relative." To speak of truth as "absolute" is to say that something is true absolutely, or not relative to something else. By that we might mean true unconditionally, "no matter what."

© Copyright Original Source

Source: http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/absolute-truth.htm

Absolute Truth - Inflexible Reality

"Absolute truth" is defined as inflexible reality: fixed, invariable, unalterable facts. For example, it is a fixed, invariable, unalterable fact that there are absolutely no square circles and there are absolutely no round squares.

© Copyright Original Source

OK, how is the fact that black swans exist relative? Please explain. But according to your reference you do believe that we can know absolute truth - there are absolutely no round squares. So human can know some absolute truths. We agree!

[seer]

You seer, are assuming that the nature of reality has to do with God. So let me pose the same question to you that I posed to Sparko. If god did not exist, could A then be both A and not-A at the same time?

No, Shuny brought God up in our discussion, ask him.

[seer]

The problem is the claim of 'universal generalization' of the claim of absolute truth.

How on earth is the fact that black swans exist a generalization?

Logician bones, Sparko and you are claiming a universal generalization in absolute truth and the absolute view of the law of non-contradiction, which is the fallacy.

So the law of non-contradiction is not universal? It could be false?

[shunyadragon]

How on earth is the fact that black swans exist a generalization?

The existence of only white swans is the generalization.

So the law of non-contradiction is not universal? It could be false?

From the human perspective there can be logical contradictions (black swans), from the perspective of God an 'absolute truth' there are absolutely no contradictions, or if God(s) do not exist, there are no contradictions in the Ultimate absolute nature of our physical existence.

Again . . .

The fallacy of the white swan/black swan is a 'cherry picking fallacy. The black swan in this fallacy are the possibility of contradictions in the human view of logic. You have a very poor grasp of elemental fallacies.

Read again . . .

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

Falsifiability or refutability of a statement, hypothesis, or theory is the inherent possibility that it can be proven false. A statement is called falsifiable if it is possible to conceive of an observation or an argument which negates the statement in question. In this sense, falsify is synonymous with nullify, meaning to invalidate or "show to be false".

For example, by the problem of induction, no number of confirming observations can verify a universal generalization, such as All swans are white, since it is logically possible to falsify it by observing a single black swan. Thus, the term falsifiability is sometimes synonymous to testability. Some statements, such as It will be raining here in one million years, are falsifiable in principle, but not in practice.

© Copyright Original Source

[seer]

The existence of only white swans is the generalization.

NO ONE SAID THAT ONLY WHITE SWANS EXIST. I, and Sparko, said the black swans exist - how is that a generalization?

From the human perspective there can be logical contradictions (black swans), from the perspective of God an 'absolute truth' there are absolutely no contradictions, or if God(s) do not exist, there are no contradictions in the Ultimate absolute nature of our physical existence.

So to humans the sun could both exist and not exist at the same moment? And you agree with your link that we can know absolute truth in some cases: there are absolutely no round squares.