Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-08-2015, 05:02 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 10:44 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Here religion is more a matter of tradition and way to justify one's bigotry.

Another bullseye.. Cool

“Narg know people come back somtimes. Narg wait. You no need sword. Put sword down. Narg no hurt.” – Narg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2015, 06:14 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 09:51 AM)Matrim Cauthon Wrote:  
(30-08-2015 09:40 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  favorite character of all time in a novel, bloody right he is!

Hell - to the - YES! Wink LOL

(30-08-2015 09:40 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  I can prove it...[SNIP]...They are allowed to be certain but I am not?

Don't you mean it's 'less probable than a million other possibilities'? I was right with you until you begin to suggest ability to 'prove a negative'...? Perhaps it's just 'terms/definitions' in this case - but I'd assumed that, YES, all I can say is that any kind of theism is 'improbable' - but then can also say, that it's more probable to be struck by lightning in a cave, 10 times in a row, in less than 10 minutes - than that any theism is true. Sure - it's 'possible'...but waaaaaaay highly 'improbable'.

EDIT: Which...per the above, I suppose you can get 'certainty'...but that's per a subjective view of it's meaning. I.e., I don't think you could reach as far as to say "I know theism isn't true, and can prove it factually".

Thoughts?

Actually I can. I'm not proving a negative though. I don't start with nothing and prove non-existence. There's no obligation to prove that the non-existent doesn't exist. There is no evidence for non-existence. No, I start with existence and show that the idea of god contradicts it at the most fundamental level. Christianity and all other forms of theism make certain claims about the nature of the universe that can and have been refuted. I can prove it in two premises.

If existence has metaphysical primacy over consciousness, then the claims of theism, i.e., the existence of a conscious being which created everything in existence by an act of conscious will, maintains it by conscious will and can alter it by an act of conscious will, are false.

Existence holds primacy over consciousness.

Therefore theism is false.

The beauty of this argument is that it is irrefutable. To deny premise one would be to deny the law of non-contradiction and thus, the law of identity. Since the concept "identity" is axiomatic, this can not be done. Any attempt to deny it would first have to accept it and use it in order to deny it.

The second premise is axiomatic as well since the primacy of existence is also an axiomatic concept. Because The concept "truth" rests on it logically, no truth can ever contradict it. Therefore any assailant would have to use the very concept he is seeking to refute.

I need not defend it against every specific challenge, just point out that both premises are axiomatic and therefore incontestably true. This argument's logic is impeccable and its premises are incontestably true. Therefore its conclusion can not fail to be true. Open and shut case.

But I also like the formulation presented by Dawson Bethrick over at Incinerating Presupposionalism..

He lays it out in three succinct and equally irrefutable steps:

Step One: Establish that truth rests exclusively on the primacy of existence.

P1-1: If truth is the identification of reality based on facts which obtain independently of conscious activity (such as preferences, likes and dislikes, wishes, fantasies, emotions, temper tantrums, evasion, etc.), then truth rests exclusively on the primacy of existence metaphysics.

P1-2: Truth is the identification of reality based on facts which obtain independently of conscious activity (such as preferences, likes and dislikes, wishes, fantasies, emotions, temper tantrums, evasion, etc.).
C1: Therefore, truth rests exclusively on the primacy of existence metaphysics.

This argument firmly establishes that "wishing doesn't make it so". It establishes that the truth is objective. The only alternative is that "wishing does make it so".

Step two: Establish that theism affirms the primacy of Consciousness, i.e. wishing makes it so.

P2-1: If theism affirms the existence of a being which can create existence by an act of will, alter the nature of objects which are distinct from itself by an act of will, and/or cause such objects to act by an act of will, then theism assumes the primacy of consciousness metaphysics.
P2-2: Theism affirms the existence of a being which can create existence by an act of will, alter the nature of objects which are distinct from itself by an act of will, and/or cause such to act in any way by an act of will.
C2: Therefore, theism assumes the primacy of consciousness metaphysics.

Here he demonstrates conclusively that theism assumes the primacy of consciousness or "wishing does make it so".

Step 3: Prove that theism can not be true.

P3-1: If theism assumes the primacy of consciousness metaphysics, then theism is incompatible with the primacy of existence metaphysics and consequently cannot be true. (From Step 1 above)
P3-2: Theism assumes the primacy of consciousness metaphysics. (From Step 2 above)
C3: Therefore theism is incompatible with the primacy of existence metaphysics and consequently cannot be true.

I like the formulation that I used above because it is simple but it requires a lot of explanation. I think Mr. Bethrick's formulation is easier to understand and needs far less explanation. I've seen other formulations but no matter how it is presented, the primacy of existence principle is instant death to theism. On a proper view of the subject/ object relationship, theism lasts as long as a snowflake in a blow torch flame.

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
30-08-2015, 06:52 PM (This post was last modified: 30-08-2015 07:02 PM by houseofcantor.)
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 06:14 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  -waxes philosophic-

Streamlined this balloon since last you tried to float it. My original concern still stands, but hey, that's beyond the scope of this discussion. Big Grin

Oh, was this the link you were looking for? linky-linky

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
30-08-2015, 07:00 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 06:52 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(30-08-2015 06:14 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  -waxes philosophic-

Streamlined this balloon since last you tried to float it. My original concern still stands, but hey, that's beyond the scope of this discussion. Big Grin

Well yes I have. That is my purpose in engaging with theists, to clarify and refine my own thinking. Each time I try to be more succinct and clearer in my presentation.

I don't remember what your concerns were. Do you mind telling me what they were? This is not a ballon but an argument so if you have some flaw to point out please do.

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
30-08-2015, 07:08 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 07:00 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  This is not a ballon but an argument so if you have some flaw to point out please do.

Not a flaw so much as a concern which would be a digression here, besides, I'd hafta go sift that sea you call a blog, first (it's all tiny and dark and way away on this screen) and if the concern still remains, I'll link it to your original thread. Thumbsup

(Don't sweat the apparent tone, I'm all silly and full of Gwynnies. )

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2015, 07:36 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 07:08 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(30-08-2015 07:00 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  This is not a ballon but an argument so if you have some flaw to point out please do.

Not a flaw so much as a concern which would be a digression here, besides, I'd hafta go sift that sea you call a blog, first (it's all tiny and dark and way away on this screen) and if the concern still remains, I'll link it to your original thread. Thumbsup

(Don't sweat the apparent tone, I'm all silly and full of Gwynnies. )

You don't have to sift through it all. I only linked to it in order to give credit where credit is due. The argument trades on a single principle, wishing doesn't make it so. That and the law of non-contradiction.

I have to agree with you that Gwenneth Paltrow is one of the hottest women on the planet. I'me sure you've seen her in Great Expectations. Daymm!

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
30-08-2015, 07:42 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 07:36 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  I have to agree with you that Gwenneth Paltrow is one of the hottest women on the planet. I'me sure you've seen her in Great Expectations. Daymm!

What were we arguing about?
[Image: Love-birds-images.jpg]

(He wrote up an elaboration that needs to be parsed for my own gratification and to see if my concern was addressed. But that's later on my iPad in my sack. Wink )

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
30-08-2015, 07:47 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 07:42 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(30-08-2015 07:36 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  I have to agree with you that Gwenneth Paltrow is one of the hottest women on the planet. I'me sure you've seen her in Great Expectations. Daymm!

What were we arguing about?
[Image: Love-birds-images.jpg]

(He wrote up an elaboration that needs to be parsed for my own gratification and to see if my concern was addressed. But that's later on my iPad in my sack. Wink )

I believe it was which water fountain scene was hotter! Definitely the grown up Gwenneth.

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
30-08-2015, 07:52 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
(30-08-2015 07:47 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  I believe it was which water fountain scene was hotter! Definitely the grown up Gwenneth.

If you missed Shallow Hal, A View from the Top, and Duets; you may wanna scope 'em. Dang girl. Drooling

OK, we prolly should get back to the other thing now. Big Grin

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
30-08-2015, 09:21 PM
RE: Probable, or Not. The 1000 flavors is boring me...
OK true scotsman, I have parsed those data and have formulated a well-considered, thoroughly reasoned rebuttal:

Objectivism is wrong because Ayn Rand. Big Grin

My concern earlier was that why accept one axiom as having more validity; Burner's response seems to be, well, then, present the alternative. Sure, there is more to it than that, but exploring the validity of Objectivism seems to be beyond the scope of this thread. Here, the question seems to be, is the primacy of existence sufficient justification of a 7, and yeah, I can go with that.

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: