Logic Proof for God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-04-2015, 06:51 AM
RE: Logic Proof for God
(08-04-2015 08:31 PM)kselfri Wrote:  The fact that the universe has behaved in accordance with mathematics for 13.8 billion years...

The universe doesn't behave in accordance with mathematics; mathematics describes the way the universe behaves. You have the cart squarely before the horse.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like unfogged's post
09-04-2015, 09:59 AM
RE: Logic Proof for God
Mathematics is a language we developed to measure and describe the world around us. It fits the universe to the extent that we understand and can describe the universe. When we learn something new our description changes, the mathematics changes. Mathematics a language like art is a language. Are we surprised to see real things represented in paintings? Why would we be surprised to see real things represented in equations?

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Hafnof's post
09-04-2015, 02:54 PM
RE: Logic Proof for God
(08-04-2015 09:10 PM)kselfri Wrote:  
(08-04-2015 05:53 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Math is an emergent property of conscious thought. Without a mind to observe it, it does not exist because math is an abstract concept. It isn't matter or energy.

...and the physics of the universe follow these abstract rules of math & logic. Therefore, it was created by a mind. The proof, again, in a round-about way.

Where are you getting these concepts from? Where did you get the concept "abstraction"? It's not from the Bible. Therefore you are stealing these concepts from other philosophies. You are "leaning on your own understanding". The Bible has plenty to say about what we can do with our genitals and what cloth to wear and what foods to eat but it has absolutely nothing to say about how to think and use these wonderful tools we have up there in the brain pan. Nothing.

I've asked you a couple of times to show us the biblical theory of concepts and you are silent. You want to say that logic and abstractions are dependent on a god but you can't tell us what these things are without borrowing them from other, Human derived systems of thought. That's because the primitive Humans who wrote the Bible had no idea either about logic and abstractions even though their discovery pre-dates the New Testament.

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
09-04-2015, 03:23 PM
RE: Logic Proof for God
(09-04-2015 02:54 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(08-04-2015 09:10 PM)kselfri Wrote:  ...and the physics of the universe follow these abstract rules of math & logic. Therefore, it was created by a mind. The proof, again, in a round-about way.

Where are you getting these concepts from? Where did you get the concept "abstraction"? It's not from the Bible. Therefore you are stealing these concepts from other philosophies. You are "leaning on your own understanding". The Bible has plenty to say about what we can do with our genitals and what cloth to wear and what foods to eat but it has absolutely nothing to say about how to think and use these wonderful tools we have up there in the brain pan. Nothing.

I've asked you a couple of times to show us the biblical theory of concepts and you are silent. You want to say that logic and abstractions are dependent on a god but you can't tell us what these things are without borrowing them from other, Human derived systems of thought. That's because the primitive Humans who wrote the Bible had no idea either about logic and abstractions even though their discovery pre-dates the New Testament.

You keep expecting the Bible to have all these other topics in it. It's a theological & historical text. You wouldn't expect your physics textbook to also cover philosophy, or your grammar textbook to cover math, or your math book to cover religion. Books, with exception of the encyclopedias, are dedicated to one topic.

What's wrong with presenting a proof which doesn't rely on the Bible? Those who don't believe what's in the Bible to start with would automatically reject any proof which bases any of its premises on it. One can arrive at a belief in a god regardless of any specific theological text.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2015, 03:27 PM
RE: Logic Proof for God
(09-04-2015 09:59 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  Mathematics is a language we developed to measure and describe the world around us. It fits the universe to the extent that we understand and can describe the universe. When we learn something new our description changes, the mathematics changes. Mathematics a language like art is a language. Are we surprised to see real things represented in paintings? Why would we be surprised to see real things represented in equations?

The art vs. mathematics analogy is flawed. A painting depicts real things because one made a visual observation, then copied it. Mathematics is capable of the opposite. It can predict the existence of physical behaviors & entities before they're observed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2015, 03:30 PM
RE: Logic Proof for God
(09-04-2015 03:23 PM)kselfri Wrote:  
(09-04-2015 02:54 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Where are you getting these concepts from? Where did you get the concept "abstraction"? It's not from the Bible. Therefore you are stealing these concepts from other philosophies. You are "leaning on your own understanding". The Bible has plenty to say about what we can do with our genitals and what cloth to wear and what foods to eat but it has absolutely nothing to say about how to think and use these wonderful tools we have up there in the brain pan. Nothing.

I've asked you a couple of times to show us the biblical theory of concepts and you are silent. You want to say that logic and abstractions are dependent on a god but you can't tell us what these things are without borrowing them from other, Human derived systems of thought. That's because the primitive Humans who wrote the Bible had no idea either about logic and abstractions even though their discovery pre-dates the New Testament.

You keep expecting the Bible to have all these other topics in it. It's a theological & historical text. You wouldn't expect your physics textbook to also cover philosophy, or your grammar textbook to cover math, or your math book to cover religion. Books, with exception of the encyclopedias, are dedicated to one topic.

What's wrong with presenting a proof which doesn't rely on the Bible? Those who don't believe what's in the Bible to start with would automatically reject any proof which bases any of its premises on it. One can arrive at a belief in a god regardless of any specific theological text.

Because the concept of God affirms a primacy of consciousness metaphysics, which negates logic and math. Many Christians ask me to "account for" logic without a god and yet God's book, the Bible, has nothing to say on the subject. You and every other theist are stealing from my philosophy while at the same time denying its fundamental principles. That's the fallacy of the stolen concept.

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
09-04-2015, 03:31 PM
Logic Proof for God
Math is an abstract creation from the description of something that exists. Art is an abstract creation from a description of something that exists.

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
09-04-2015, 03:38 PM
RE: Logic Proof for God
The issue is that you think the universe is derived from math, when it's the exact opposite.

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
09-04-2015, 03:39 PM
Logic Proof for God
You could call math the language of the universe. And like a language, it's an abstract creation by humans used for communicating information.

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
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
09-04-2015, 03:39 PM
RE: Logic Proof for God
(09-04-2015 12:56 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-04-2015 08:13 PM)kselfri Wrote:  Then how do you explain that the planets travel in ellipses (a mathematical equation) or that light travels at a constant speed (a constant quantity), or all the other physical behaviors of the universe being in accordance with mathematical equations? How was it that Higgs was able to, using math & logic, predict the existence of a particle to be discovered decades later? Following your reasoning, if humans were to go extinct, the planets would suddenly change their orbits to random wiggles, the speed of light would fluctuate randomly, and the universe would descend into chaos.

No. You've missed the point entirely. Math is ONE system that appears to describe, under some circumstances, what humans observe. We KNOW that at the boundary of a singularity, the laws break down, thus are not really "constants" under ALL circumstances. The motion described by *ellipses* (and which could be described in other ways in other systems by other observers) are not immutable. You still have not defined your terms : "mind", and "thought", and you have yet to prove that only minds are capable of thought, and you have yet to explain how thought is possible in the absence of time, or that space-time exists in any other reality than this universe. You're simply slapping entirely anthropological terms onto a system/conditions where they did not/may not apply.

Your argument is the argumentum ad ignorantium ( http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance ) fallacy. Your premises have also been proven false, (there are internally logical systems which do not obtain), and there are some things which are observed which are not "logical", (no absolute reference for space-time / Relativity, Uncertainty, Double Slit experiment observation that electrons go through BOTH slits and particles behave as waves.

There is also no way, no matter whether you can cook up a non-fallacious argument or not (which you have not yet done), to prove that it applies to "a god" or any gods, (a term you have not defined, which in fact has no coherent definition). Gods which have properties (of necessity) would be embedded in the fabric of Reality "necessarily" thus not able to create the very Reality in which they "of necessity" must participate.

Relativity is logical (though counter-intuitive), as it was derived using mathematics. It was later shown to be true by experiment. The double slit experiment is logical, but again, counter-intuitive, when weighed against our everyday macroscopic experience. It's no less logical than an equation having two solutions: x^2 = 1. Valid solutions to the equation are both x=1, and x=-1. Likewise, the wave equation has multiple solutions, so the particle passes through both slits. When you measure it, you interfere with it and limit the possible solutions to the wave equation, collapsing it, and you see more of a particle behavior.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: