Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-09-2017, 06:28 AM
Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
I've been in a debate on Reddit and this line of thinking really is driving me nuts. This user keeps coming back to "there is no evidence that the physical is all there is. So it's not logical to believe that the physical is all there is."

His argument is that logic itself shows that there is more.

"There must be some non-physical part of the universe since Logic isn't possible in a physical only universe where every action, word and thought of humans is determined by prior causal conditions and the physical laws.

I.e. if all of one's thoughts determined by the atoms and their subatomic particles [which must act in accordance to the physical laws[ then how can one say that they have objectively concluded whether a logical argument is valid?

They are like an actor in a play reading a pre-written script. They say the argument is valid but have no way to have reached that conclusion via an objective analysis and evaluation.

Yet here we are at least trying to be logical and evaluating each other arguments.

And it gets worse, as we cannot say that we know anything since that would be part of that pre-written script as well.

A physical only universe leaves us with no logic, and no knowledge."


I'm looking at this and just in my gut it seems wrong, but I cannot articulate why. Anyone out there seem to see a flaw? My first thought is that logic isn't a thing, it's a set of rules to coherently rationalize the universe.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes herrozerro's post
15-09-2017, 06:32 AM
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
That is an argument from ignorance.

Person 1: "We don't know that the universe is all there is, therefore I believe it is possible it isn't." <-Bull and shit

Not knowing one thing, doesn't make a default answer any more likely. In order to conclude that it is possible for something other than our universe to exist, one needs to show (evidentially) that it is even possible for something other than our universe to exist. Being able to imagine something else =/= demonstrating that it is possible.

It would be akin to this example:
Person 2: "We don't have evidence that unicorns don't exist, so they might very well exist but their magic prevents them from being detected by scientific means."

Person 3: "That's nice dear. I hear that Bilbo Baggins is a nasty little Hobbitses. Steer clear of him if you come across him on your search for unicorns."

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
15-09-2017, 06:43 AM
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
Ask him what form of logic he is referring to. First order predicate calculus? Propositional logic? Syllogistic logic? Modal logic? Computational logic? Fuzzy logic?

Also if 'Logic isn't possible in a physical only universe where every action, word and thought of humans is determined by prior causal conditions and the physical laws', why does it work in a computer?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Mathilda's post
15-09-2017, 06:56 AM
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
(15-09-2017 06:32 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  That is an argument from ignorance.

Person 1: "We don't know that the universe is all there is, therefore I believe it is possible it isn't." <-Bull and shit

Not knowing one thing, doesn't make a default answer any more likely. In order to conclude that it is possible for something other than our universe to exist, one needs to show (evidentially) that it is even possible for something other than our universe to exist. Being able to imagine something else =/= demonstrating that it is possible.

It would be akin to this example:
Person 2: "We don't have evidence that unicorns don't exist, so they might very well exist but their magic prevents them from being detected by scientific means."

Person 3: "That's nice dear. I hear that Bilbo Baggins is a nasty little Hobbitses. Steer clear of him if you come across him on your search for unicorns."

No lie here is his response see already from last night.

"So we agree, unicorns and a "physical only model" of the universe both have the same amount of evidence.

The only question is why do I reject both but some hold onto the "physical only model" of the universe? "

He's stuck on the idea that you can prove a negative. At least in this case.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2017, 07:01 AM
Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
You might ask him why his argument, which relies on the existence of logic as “proof” of a guiding intelligence, is dependent on the rejection of logic. He can’t have it both ways.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Rachel's post
15-09-2017, 07:06 AM
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
(15-09-2017 06:56 AM)herrozerro Wrote:  
(15-09-2017 06:32 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  That is an argument from ignorance.

Person 1: "We don't know that the universe is all there is, therefore I believe it is possible it isn't." <-Bull and shit

Not knowing one thing, doesn't make a default answer any more likely. In order to conclude that it is possible for something other than our universe to exist, one needs to show (evidentially) that it is even possible for something other than our universe to exist. Being able to imagine something else =/= demonstrating that it is possible.

It would be akin to this example:
Person 2: "We don't have evidence that unicorns don't exist, so they might very well exist but their magic prevents them from being detected by scientific means."

Person 3: "That's nice dear. I hear that Bilbo Baggins is a nasty little Hobbitses. Steer clear of him if you come across him on your search for unicorns."

No lie here is his response see already from last night.

"So we agree, unicorns and a "physical only model" of the universe both have the same amount of evidence.

The only question is why do I reject both but some hold onto the "physical only model" of the universe? "

He's stuck on the idea that you can prove a negative. At least in this case.

He misconstrued the argument to construct another argument from ignorance.

We have evidence of this universe, where is the evidence of anything existing that isn't part of this universe? One can't assert it is possible for something beyond our universe to exist, without evidence of it (once again, an imagination gets us nowhere).

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
15-09-2017, 07:12 AM
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
(15-09-2017 06:28 AM)herrozerro Wrote:  I.e. if all of one's thoughts determined by the atoms and their subatomic particles [which must act in accordance to the physical laws[ then how can one say that they have objectively concluded whether a logical argument is valid?

Ask him why shouldn't one be able to conclude a logical argument to be valid if all thoughts are deterministic.

Theists do this a lot. They pose questions assuming something to be true and expect you to answer that question, but they don't explain their assumptions. They deliberately try to pin you down to an impossible answer or their answer. But this involves lots of false assumptions that you can ask about.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Mathilda's post
15-09-2017, 07:12 AM (This post was last modified: 15-09-2017 07:16 AM by Banjo.)
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
Kick him in the balls. Then ask him if he feels the results of the universe.

Metaphorically speaking.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Banjo's post
15-09-2017, 07:22 AM
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
(15-09-2017 07:12 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Kick him in the balls. Then ask him if he feels the results of the universe.

Metaphorically speaking.

Lol.

Yeah, I've read his other threads and pretty much this is what he falls back on. I don't think he is being intellectually honest. One user might say "We no evidence that anything beyond our universe exists." To which he just replies "We have no evidence that there is not nothing beyond our universe."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2017, 07:25 AM
RE: Does logic mean there is more than the physical universe?
(15-09-2017 06:28 AM)herrozerro Wrote:  I've been in a debate on Reddit and this line of thinking really is driving me nuts. This user keeps coming back to "there is no evidence that the physical is all there is. So it's not logical to believe that the physical is all there is."

His argument is that logic itself shows that there is more.

"There must be some non-physical part of the universe since Logic isn't possible in a physical only universe where every action, word and thought of humans is determined by prior causal conditions and the physical laws.

I.e. if all of one's thoughts determined by the atoms and their subatomic particles [which must act in accordance to the physical laws[ then how can one say that they have objectively concluded whether a logical argument is valid?

They are like an actor in a play reading a pre-written script. They say the argument is valid but have no way to have reached that conclusion via an objective analysis and evaluation.

Yet here we are at least trying to be logical and evaluating each other arguments.

And it gets worse, as we cannot say that we know anything since that would be part of that pre-written script as well.

A physical only universe leaves us with no logic, and no knowledge."


I'm looking at this and just in my gut it seems wrong, but I cannot articulate why. Anyone out there seem to see a flaw? My first thought is that logic isn't a thing, it's a set of rules to coherently rationalize the universe.

Like TheBeardedDude said, it's an argument from ignorance as well as an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Then he thinks he can shove whatever assertion he can come up with into the mix without having anything to fall back on other than "you can't prove it's not real".

Seriously, don't waste your time, this is an annoying characteristic of our species, trying to confer authority on yourself without a basis. This person is wallowing in convincing himself of his brilliance. Life is too short to waste time on screeching monkeys.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: