On the Existence of Garage Dragons
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-08-2015, 07:29 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 04:35 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  Ok, let's suppose that the garage dragon does exist.

It doesn't. In fact, it can't. That is rather the point.

There is no difference between the garage dragon and no dragon. To say that the garage dragon "exists" is self-contradictory; the garage dragon is defined as non-existent.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 07:31 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 05:12 PM)Stevil Wrote:  When Carl asked the question
"what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all?"
It's quite a pertinent question.

If there is no difference

...then there is no dragon.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 10:16 PM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 04:48 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 04:46 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is no reason to suppose it exists. That's the whole point of the example.

Right, but also no reason to conclude that it doesn't exist, as Sagan never concluded that god doesn't exist. Not only did he never come to that conclusion, but he criticized those who did by calling them arrogant.

You mean other than the fact that it is undetectable and unfalsefiable?

Call me arrogant.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Full Circle's post
21-08-2015, 10:18 PM
On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 10:16 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 04:48 PM)Matt Finney Wrote:  Right, but also no reason to conclude that it doesn't exist, as Sagan never concluded that god doesn't exist. Not only did he never come to that conclusion, but he criticized those who did by calling them arrogant.

You mean other than the fact that it is undetectable and unfalsefiable?

Call me arrogant.

I'm one arrogant mother fucker I guess

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
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
22-08-2015, 12:38 AM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(21-08-2015 07:29 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  the garage dragon is defined as non-existent.
Only by Unbeliever. Carl never ever defined a "garage dragon" as non-existent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2015, 01:08 AM (This post was last modified: 22-08-2015 01:20 AM by Chas.)
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(22-08-2015 12:38 AM)Stevil Wrote:  
(21-08-2015 07:29 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  the garage dragon is defined as non-existent.
Only by Unbeliever. Carl never ever defined a "garage dragon" as non-existent.

He didn't define it that way, but his argument clearly leads that way.

"Now what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true."

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
22-08-2015, 01:45 AM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(22-08-2015 01:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(22-08-2015 12:38 AM)Stevil Wrote:  Only by Unbeliever. Carl never ever defined a "garage dragon" as non-existent.

He didn't define it that way, but his argument clearly leads that way.

"Now what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true."
No it doesn't.

You are certainly taking the analogy too far.

If you think that you have to restrict Carl's point (supported by the garage dragon analogy) to an invisible, non interactive entity, then it only applies to deist type gods. If you try to argue this with a deist believer, they wouldn't really care. Their belief in a god has no bearing what so ever on their lives.

If you try to tell them that their god being non observable and not interactive means it doesn't exist. They would be quite right in showing you the logical fallicy in your thinking.

If you try to tell them that there is no physical difference (or no difference from a human perspective) regarding whether their god exists or not, they would probably agree with you.

This interpretation is really a non starter.
It makes Carl's point meaningless.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
22-08-2015, 02:11 AM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(22-08-2015 01:45 AM)Stevil Wrote:  
(22-08-2015 01:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  He didn't define it that way, but his argument clearly leads that way.

"Now what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true."
No it doesn't.

You are certainly taking the analogy too far.

No, you are reading more into it than is there. There is more in the chapter, but not in the example.

Quote:If you think that you have to restrict Carl's point (supported by the garage dragon analogy) to an invisible, non interactive entity, then it only applies to deist type gods. If you try to argue this with a deist believer, they wouldn't really care. Their belief in a god has no bearing what so ever on their lives.

His point is about anything undetectable.

Quote:If you try to tell them that their god being non observable and not interactive means it doesn't exist. They would be quite right in showing you the logical fallicy in your thinking.

No, it means you can't tell the difference between their god and no god. Where is the fallacy?

Quote:If you try to tell them that there is no physical difference (or no difference from a human perspective) regarding whether their god exists or not, they would probably agree with you.

Good, then their belief is utter bullshit.

Quote:This interpretation is really a non starter.
It makes Carl's point meaningless.

No, it is precisely Sagan's point. There is no difference between undetectable and non-existent.

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
22-08-2015, 04:14 AM
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(22-08-2015 02:11 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(22-08-2015 01:45 AM)Stevil Wrote:  No it doesn't.

You are certainly taking the analogy too far.

No, you are reading more into it than is there. There is more in the chapter, but not in the example.

Quote:If you think that you have to restrict Carl's point (supported by the garage dragon analogy) to an invisible, non interactive entity, then it only applies to deist type gods. If you try to argue this with a deist believer, they wouldn't really care. Their belief in a god has no bearing what so ever on their lives.

His point is about anything undetectable.

Quote:If you try to tell them that their god being non observable and not interactive means it doesn't exist. They would be quite right in showing you the logical fallicy in your thinking.

No, it means you can't tell the difference between their god and no god. Where is the fallacy?

Quote:If you try to tell them that there is no physical difference (or no difference from a human perspective) regarding whether their god exists or not, they would probably agree with you.

Good, then their belief is utter bullshit.

Quote:This interpretation is really a non starter.
It makes Carl's point meaningless.

No, it is precisely Sagan's point. There is no difference between undetectable and non-existent.

Chas,

Does the fact that we haven't detected an alien spacecraft traveling towards earth guarantee that there isn't one?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2015, 05:23 AM (This post was last modified: 22-08-2015 10:27 AM by Chas.)
RE: On the Existence of Garage Dragons
(22-08-2015 04:14 AM)Matt Finney Wrote:  
(22-08-2015 02:11 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, you are reading more into it than is there. There is more in the chapter, but not in the example.


His point is about anything undetectable.


No, it means you can't tell the difference between their god and no god. Where is the fallacy?


Good, then their belief is utter bullshit.


No, it is precisely Sagan's point. There is no difference between undetectable and non-existent.

Chas,

Does the fact that we haven't detected an alien spacecraft traveling towards earth guarantee that there isn't one?

Oh, for fuck's sake. An alien spacecraft isn't in principle undetectable. A garage dragon is.

Why can't you understand that this is the point of the garage dragon? Facepalm

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: