How to convert True Scotsman
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-06-2014, 05:54 PM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
I have the answer!

[Image: 20gftx0.png]

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
22-06-2014, 06:45 PM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
If a tree falls in a forest and no one or no "thing" capable of hearing it is around to hear it. It does NOT make a sound. A Sound is only a sound because someone or something is around to hear it. That is what sound is.

For instance, If 100% of all life evolved to have absolutely no concept of what "light is". Because we cannot see or work off sound waves or something of that sort. Then light is something that becomes impossible for us to not only detect, but understand or even think of existing.

The same thing goes for that falling tree sound. If no one is around to hear it, it never made a sound since nothing heard it.

We know the universe exists because we perceive it. Now, lets say we did not exist.

How would we know it exists if we ourselves do not exist?

Can you prove that the universe exists if YOU never existed? How would you know if the universe existed if you never existed? Did you know the universe existed before you started to exist in this universe? No you did not.

It would be Impossible to tell because we don't, didn't or will ever exist to THINK or PERCEIVE the universe. I think therefor I am right? I perceive therefor it exists!

You CANNOT say just because Humans never existed the universe would still be here because YOU ALREADY KNOW IT EXISTS. You have been tainted with the realization that the universe has existed before us and will exist after us.

It is because you have already perceived the universe of existing that we know in our "minds" that the universe is subjective to our consciousness alone. Without our consciousness, we would have no idea that anything exists. Its because we perceive that makes the universe real around us and what gives individual meaning to everything.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2014, 12:04 AM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
Hi Shadow fox,

You wrote: If a tree falls in a forest and no one or no "thing" capable of hearing it is around to hear it. It does NOT make a sound. A Sound is only a sound because someone or something is around to hear it. That is what sound is.

You are reversing the law of causality. We perceive a sound when vibrations of air molecules act on our ear drum causing neurons to fire in our brain. The cause, the vibrating air molecules, precedes the effect, our eardrums vibrating and stimulating our brains. You are saying that we first have the effect, the firing of neurons in the hearing center of our brains, creating the cause, the vibrations of the air and then presumably the vibrations in the air causing the tree to fall.

There is a causal chain that we can follow so there is no doubt that the falling tree causes the air to vibrate even if there are no eardrums around to pick up the sound waves.

You wrote: For instance, If 100% of all life evolved to have absolutely no concept of what "light is". Because we cannot see or work off sound waves or something of that sort. Then light is something that becomes impossible for us to not only detect, but understand or even think of existing.

This is just patently false. We can not directly perceive neutrinos and yet they exist. We predicted their existence before we had a means of detecting them. Since we can't perceive them directly we had to infer them. We then had to design equipment to detect them. Concepts are not the product of evolution. They are the product of our conceptual faculty identifying and then integrating the data brought to us by our senses which is a volitional process. There are no such thing as automatic or inherited concepts.

You wrote: We know the universe exists because we perceive it. Now, lets say we did not exist. How would we know it exists if we ourselves do not exist?


That's true we wouldn't know it if we didn't exist.

You wrote: Its because we perceive that makes the universe real around us and what gives individual meaning to everything.

No. We perceive it because it is real around us it's not real around us because we perceive it. You are failing to integrate the nature of our senses and how they work. Our consciousness is the faculty which perceives that which exists not the faculty which creates that which exists. This is perceptually self evident. The relationship between the subject of consciousness and its objects is directly observable. It is contextually fixed and uni directional. You can test it any time you like. Imagine a bar of gold in your mind and then make it appear on your table in front of you. It can't be done because consciousness does not have primacy over existence.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like true scotsman's post
23-06-2014, 12:09 AM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
Hi Shadow fox,

You wrote: If a tree falls in a forest and no one or no "thing" capable of hearing it is around to hear it. It does NOT make a sound. A Sound is only a sound because someone or something is around to hear it. That is what sound is.

You are reversing the law of causality. We perceive a sound when vibrations of air molecules act on our ear drum causing neurons to fire in our brain. The cause, the vibrating air molecules, precedes the effect, our eardrums vibrating and stimulating our brains. You are saying that we first have the effect, the firing of neurons in the hearing center of our brains, creating the cause, the vibrations of the air and then presumably the vibrations in the air causing the tree to fall.

There is a causal chain that we can follow so there is no doubt that the falling tree causes the air to vibrate even if there are no eardrums around to pick up the sound waves.

You wrote: For instance, If 100% of all life evolved to have absolutely no concept of what "light is". Because we cannot see or work off sound waves or something of that sort. Then light is something that becomes impossible for us to not only detect, but understand or even think of existing.

This is just patently false. We can not directly perceive neutrinos and yet they exist. We predicted their existence before we had a means of detecting them. Since we can't perceive them directly we had to infer them. We then had to design equipment to detect them. This proves that existence is not dependent on perception, perception is dependent on existence. This proves that existence has primacy over consciousness.

Concepts are not the product of evolution. They are the product of our conceptual faculty identifying and then integrating the data brought to us by our senses which is a volitional process. There are no such thing as automatic or inherited concepts.

You wrote: We know the universe exists because we perceive it. Now, lets say we did not exist. How would we know it exists if we ourselves do not exist?


That's true we wouldn't know it if we didn't exist.

You wrote: Its because we perceive that makes the universe real around us and what gives individual meaning to everything.

No. We perceive it because it is real around us it's not real around us because we perceive it. You are failing to integrate the nature of our senses and how they work. Our consciousness is the faculty which perceives that which exists not the faculty which creates that which exists. This is perceptually self evident. The relationship between the subject of consciousness and its objects is directly observable. It is contextually fixed and uni- directional. You can test it any time you like. Imagine a bar of gold in your mind and then make it appear on your table in front of you. It can't be done because consciousness does not have primacy over existence.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes true scotsman's post
23-06-2014, 01:12 AM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
(23-06-2014 12:04 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  Hi Shadow fox,
You can test it any time you like. Imagine a bar of gold in your mind and then make it appear on your table in front of you. It can't be done because consciousness does not have primacy over existence.


Yes, yes it does.

Consciousness is 100% of what makes existence. You are confusing fantasy and reality and using straw men to boast your argument.

We exist and we know we exist BECAUSE we can think. Because we can feel and have emotion and have consciousness.

The universe happened. Then stuff happened in-between. However, If we never existed to begin with you could not possibly make this statement. Non of us could. There would be no point.

Let me give you an example of what the difference between something that exists and something that does not exist actually means.

Existence is perceptual. Perception can be anything from Seeing, smelling, hearing and one thing that people never seem to get right about it that you are confused about yourself.

Is thought!

A blind species cannot THINK about neutrinos because it never SAW LIGHT to begin with. It cannot. It cannot develop the idea, the technology or anything that would even come close to what light is. Does that mean light still exists? No of course not.
Not unless there is "something" around to see it and know it exists. So that thought can register it as a possibility.

Now, if I were to tell you that there was a planet in our universe where the characters from My little Pony Friendship is magic existed. You are the kind of person who would believe in this sort of thing.

Why? Because it just does exist.

Hey! if the universe still exists, even if we do not exist or existed in the first place. Thinking like that can lead you to believe anything based on the fact that we never seen it therefor god. lol.

So, there is another universe where I am married to Pinky Pie. A planet with another me who is the queen of cheese sandwich island and I just made a decree that everyone must take harmonica lessons.

The one and only reason you can possibly even think that the universe exists because we are not here to perceive it is because we DO exist and have already perceived it to have existed before us.

Therefor, because we know it existed before. It makes any argument about this mute. If we never existed to begin with than the universe itself does not exist unless there is someone else out there that can confirm it.

We ARE the universe, and the universe is we. If the universe cannot perceive itself as being here. Then it neither exists; nor, does it even matter if it does or not.

Just like a dimention of mlp characters being real actually existing or not actually matter. It don't, They do not exist until they pop on over to our world and say hello. Just like WE do not exist to them.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2014, 02:00 AM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
You know, TS, I've recently had cause to ponder the distinction between a reasonable demand and a realistic one.

In this thread, you have produced a reasonable demand. You have stated your standard of evidence for a particular claim, and then challenged those who are attempting to persuade you of that claim to meet that standard, or at least recognize that this is the goal to aim for. Alas, this is not a realistic demand.

Also, I can't help but think that your standard is too weak. It's not hard to construct a model of a plausible universe which does NOT require some sort of divine overlord. Subjectivity does not in itself imply God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2014, 02:01 AM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
Well I don't think True Scotsman is playing fair if he wilfully refuses to be swayed by appeals to emotion, appeals to authority and arguments from ignorance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Mathilda's post
23-06-2014, 02:10 AM
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
(23-06-2014 01:12 AM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  ... Does that mean light still exists? No of course not ...

You appear to be saying that without eyeballs to detect it, a range of electromagnetic radiation wavelength wouldn't exist. My (admittedly thin) knowledge of early cosmology is that there was a period of millions of years immediately after the Big Bang where radiation in the visible light spectrum saturated the young universe well before such structures as dust, let alone planets with eyeballed living organisms on them, could form.

I know there's an argument that the tree falling in the earless forest makes no sound because there's nothing to transduce the vibrating air into a neural sensation, but the tree has still fallen. A state of existence has shifted to another state, still extant. So I can't make sense of your assertion. Did I misunderstand it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2014, 06:11 AM (This post was last modified: 23-06-2014 06:56 AM by true scotsman.)
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
(23-06-2014 01:12 AM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  
(23-06-2014 12:04 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  Hi Shadow fox,
You can test it any time you like. Imagine a bar of gold in your mind and then make it appear on your table in front of you. It can't be done because consciousness does not have primacy over existence.


Yes, yes it does.

Consciousness is 100% of what makes existence. You are confusing fantasy and reality and using straw men to boast your argument.

We exist and we know we exist BECAUSE we can think. Because we can feel and have emotion and have consciousness.

The universe happened. Then stuff happened in-between. However, If we never existed to begin with you could not possibly make this statement. Non of us could. There would be no point.

Let me give you an example of what the difference between something that exists and something that does not exist actually means.

Existence is perceptual. Perception can be anything from Seeing, smelling, hearing and one thing that people never seem to get right about it that you are confused about yourself.

Is thought!

A blind species cannot THINK about neutrinos because it never SAW LIGHT to begin with. It cannot. It cannot develop the idea, the technology or anything that would even come close to what light is. Does that mean light still exists? No of course not.
Not unless there is "something" around to see it and know it exists. So that thought can register it as a possibility.

Now, if I were to tell you that there was a planet in our universe where the characters from My little Pony Friendship is magic existed. You are the kind of person who would believe in this sort of thing.

Why? Because it just does exist.

Hey! if the universe still exists, even if we do not exist or existed in the first place. Thinking like that can lead you to believe anything based on the fact that we never seen it therefor god. lol.

So, there is another universe where I am married to Pinky Pie. A planet with another me who is the queen of cheese sandwich island and I just made a decree that everyone must take harmonica lessons.

The one and only reason you can possibly even think that the universe exists because we are not here to perceive it is because we DO exist and have already perceived it to have existed before us.

Therefor, because we know it existed before. It makes any argument about this mute. If we never existed to begin with than the universe itself does not exist unless there is someone else out there that can confirm it.

We ARE the universe, and the universe is we. If the universe cannot perceive itself as being here. Then it neither exists; nor, does it even matter if it does or not.

Just like a dimention of mlp characters being real actually existing or not actually matter. It don't, They do not exist until they pop on over to our world and say hello. Just like WE do not exist to them.

OK.

Wow.

While you are wishing a bar of gold for yourself, wish one to appear on my desk as well. When it does we'll talk about whether "consciousness is 100% of what makes existence".

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like true scotsman's post
23-06-2014, 06:21 AM (This post was last modified: 23-06-2014 07:51 AM by true scotsman.)
RE: How to convert True Scotsman
(23-06-2014 02:00 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  You know, TS, I've recently had cause to ponder the distinction between a reasonable demand and a realistic one.

In this thread, you have produced a reasonable demand. You have stated your standard of evidence for a particular claim, and then challenged those who are attempting to persuade you of that claim to meet that standard, or at least recognize that this is the goal to aim for. Alas, this is not a realistic demand.

Also, I can't help but think that your standard is too weak. It's not hard to construct a model of a plausible universe which does NOT require some sort of divine overlord. Subjectivity does not in itself imply God.

It is neither reasonable or realistic. That was the whole point of the thread. Look the claim of the Christian God or any other God if it has the ability to create, maintain and alter reality by an act of conscious will affirms a primacy of consciousness metaphysics. The concepts objective, truth, argument, logic and every other concept having to do with knowledge depend on existence having primacy. So people who claim that god exists as a fact of reality, not just in their imagination, are saying existence exists independently from consciousness and there also exists this consciousness upon which existence depends. A is A and A is not A at the same time. It's impossible. Just like asking for objective proof that the universe is subjective is a contradictory statement.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes true scotsman's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: