Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-08-2014, 01:21 AM (This post was last modified: 30-08-2014 02:13 AM by phil.a.)
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(29-08-2014 07:23 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Quantum mechanics isn't random; it's probabilistic.

Yup - which hints at underlying logical structure, the nature and parameters for which is simply out of sight to us.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 01:28 AM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(29-08-2014 08:23 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Just to amplify on my last post: I claimed that we can't really prove things in the real world the way we do in logic and mathematics. I'm anticipating that phil.a will claim that this is due to Gödel's Theorems.

Nope ;P

Quote: I emphatically claim that it has nothing to do with Gödel, and here's why: Proof (formal proof, anyway) is a structure built on definitions, axioms, and rules of inference. Gödel says that even in a formal system, where all that stuff is exactly nailed down, there are limits to what we can prove. In the real world, we don't need Gödel to set limits -- the limits are set much lower right off the bat, because none of that stuff is nailed down. The definitions are fuzzy and inexact, and we don't know exactly what the axioms are. We don't have to worry about the inherent limitations of logic, because we can't even properly do logic -- key pieces of the underlying sturcture are missing. Gödel's Theorems are like the rules of a game, and we're not playing that game. We're playing a different game, with rules that are considerably looser.

I agree - so if you'd rather use that as the basis for a "the ID debate is futile" argument, then I think it's perfectly valid!


Quote:Thanks to cjlr for clearing up some of the scientific stuff. Like I said, going too deep gives me a headache, and quantum mechanics is way too deep. Tongue

False ;P

I think that if we are talking about God, it's not yet deep enough!

I think that in order to have that discussion, it's necessary to take a step right into the heart of Truth, into a place where truth becomes fully abstract (and unrepresentable).

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 06:28 AM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 01:20 AM)phil.a Wrote:  So humans aren't ever going to get to the bottom of it in practical terms, but that's completely different to saying it's not logical, I think it is logical. And if it is, then I think Godel's insights apply.

You would first have to prove that reality is a formal system. Good luck.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
30-08-2014, 07:20 AM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 01:28 AM)phil.a Wrote:  
(29-08-2014 08:23 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Just to amplify on my last post: I claimed that we can't really prove things in the real world the way we do in logic and mathematics. I'm anticipating that phil.a will claim that this is due to Gödel's Theorems.

Nope ;P

But you have been more or less claiming that all along. That has been your whole point. I'm saying Gödel has nothing to do with it. We can't prove (or disprove) the existence of God, which is what ID boils down to, for much simpler reasons (absolute lack of evidence, conceptual incoherence, etc.), not because of any Gödelian properties of logic.

You're trying to use integral calculus to count the number of apples in the bowl. Not only is it ridiculously overpowered, it's an inappropriate tool for the job.

Quote:
Quote:Thanks to cjlr for clearing up some of the scientific stuff. Like I said, going too deep gives me a headache, and quantum mechanics is way too deep. Tongue

False ;P

I think that if we are talking about God, it's not yet deep enough!

...

Phil

I meant that it was too deep for me to contemplate without cranial pain. As for God, quantum physics (and science in general) is irrelevant. God is not a scientific concept, and science won't help us answer those questions (yet another reason that has nothing to do with Gödel).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 07:25 AM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 06:28 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 01:20 AM)phil.a Wrote:  So humans aren't ever going to get to the bottom of it in practical terms, but that's completely different to saying it's not logical, I think it is logical. And if it is, then I think Godel's insights apply.

You would first have to prove that reality is a formal system. Good luck.

I admire your terseness. Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 08:28 AM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 01:21 AM)phil.a Wrote:  
(29-08-2014 07:23 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Quantum mechanics isn't random; it's probabilistic.

Yup - which hints at underlying logical structure, the nature and parameters for which is simply out of sight to us.

It does no such thing. Hidden variables are pseudo-classical straw-grasping.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
30-08-2014, 03:31 PM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 06:28 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 01:20 AM)phil.a Wrote:  So humans aren't ever going to get to the bottom of it in practical terms, but that's completely different to saying it's not logical, I think it is logical. And if it is, then I think Godel's insights apply.

You would first have to prove that reality is a formal system. Good luck.

If it's not, it can't be used to prove the existence of God

Your move.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 03:34 PM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 07:20 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  But you have been more or less claiming that all along. That has been your whole point.

No, that has nothing to do with my point.

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 03:34 PM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 08:28 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 01:21 AM)phil.a Wrote:  Yup - which hints at underlying logical structure, the nature and parameters for which is simply out of sight to us.

It does no such thing. Hidden variables are pseudo-classical straw-grasping.

That's a fancy name for it!

Does it mean anything?

Phil
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 04:13 PM
RE: Mathematical proof "intelligent design" is meaningless
(30-08-2014 03:31 PM)phil.a Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 06:28 AM)Chas Wrote:  You would first have to prove that reality is a formal system. Good luck.

If it's not, it can't be used to prove the existence of God

Your move.

Phil

My move on what? I'm not trying to prove or disprove god. What gave you that idea?

And your statement is unsupported.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: