The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-02-2017, 12:20 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:03 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Hello again Naielis.

A quick post before being "At work" robs me of a keyboard and time to focus.

First, why might you perceive "You really are a child." as an insult?

You are, by a good amount of definitions of the word, actually that. Or am I misunderstanding your stated experience amount?

The context made it apparent. He's constantly called me immature. He wasn't making an observation of my age. He was trying to make a statement about my argumentation. It was a cheap attempt at an ad hom.

(07-02-2017 12:03 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  I am also not sure if Bucky is claiming to 'love' evidence' so much as pointing out that you 'need' evidence before continuing on with 'rationality'. (Though I am possibly completely wrong and Bucky obviously knows exactly what they mean. Thumbsup )

I think Bucky is more saying that "Science works because it matches (Or its results match? Consider ) with what is evidenced by reality." ?

I am confused with how you are numbering Bucky's sentences/statements.

Are you saying Bucky is insulting because of their claim that there is evidence that people die without receiving applications of science?

Or are you indicating a different part of Bucky's response?

So... you've asked "How do people know science works?"

By looking at how well people working with the products of the scientific method have successfully achieved things/results by repeated applications their of?

Is that a sufficient answer?

I would say no it isn't. It appeals to assumptions and leads to more questions. How do you know your senses are reliably observing reality?

Quote:That people continue to apply the derived information from the applied science over and over again and gotten the same result?

That the same results continue to match that which we see in reality?

I am kind of confused some times by your wording, I must admit.

Still, sheers to the conversation and good-o with your perseverance Naielis. Thumbsup

Yes my communication is not the best in text. I'm quite surprised though that people are representing me as arrogant and dismissive. I'm really trying to engage the arguments presented. And I want to arrive at the truth. I don't understand why there needs to be any ad hominem and yet that's a lot of what I receive.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2017, 12:20 PM (This post was last modified: 07-02-2017 12:46 PM by Grasshopper.)
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:10 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 12:06 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Um.. actually.. I kind of think it would. Since the fundamentals of math are in essence derived [i]from[/i reality.

So... 'Save the Cheerleader, save the world'?

Sorry, wrong quote. Blush

If you changed (Or possibly move 'To' a new/different reality) the reality then the old math quite possibly might no longer apply/hold true. Consider

What property of physical reality could you change to make the statement 2+2=4 false?

The truth of "2+2=4" is dependent, among other things, on the definition of those symbols. There are algebraic structures in which "+" is undefined, or defined to mean something different from the common usage. Formal mathematics is all about definitions. You can also change the number base. 2+2 can equal 100 (base 2) or 11 (base 3).

As for reality: Suppose I have two glasses of water, and two other glasses of water, and I "add" them all by pouring them into a large container. I don't get four glasses of water -- I get one larger glass. Suppose I "divide" one amoeba by two (or allow it to do that all by itself). I don't get one half of an amoeba -- I get two amoebas. Reality is not required to conform absolutely to abstract structures. We build the abstract structures to conform to reality, and only use them where they are appropriate. The complex number system is enormously useful in electronics, but worthless if you're counting sheep.

[Edited to correct basic math error]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
07-02-2017, 12:22 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:17 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 12:10 PM)Naielis Wrote:  What property of physical reality could you change to make the statement 2+2=4 false?

The radix. duh.

The radix is not a property of physical reality.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2017, 12:23 PM (This post was last modified: 07-02-2017 12:32 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:22 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 12:17 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  The radix. duh.

The radix is not a property of physical reality.

You're right, it's a property of "truth" representative of just how malleable truth is. Change the axioms, change the truth. As peepot pointed out, you're thinking "save the axioms, save the truth." But you cannot petition the Lord with prayer. You can't save the number by restricting the base. It's dishonest. Truth is what's contingent.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
07-02-2017, 12:32 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:13 PM)Naielis Wrote:  What cogent arguments are countering my position that I'm not responding to?

Hello.

"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
[+] 2 users Like Unbeliever's post
07-02-2017, 12:35 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:10 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 12:06 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Um.. actually.. I kind of think it would. Since the fundamentals of math are in essence derived [i]from[/i reality.

So... 'Save the Cheerleader, save the world'?

Sorry, wrong quote. Blush

If you changed (Or possibly move 'To' a new/different reality) the reality then the old math quite possibly might no longer apply/hold true. Consider

What property of physical reality could you change to make the statement 2+2=4 false?

I'm riding my bike at 2 miles per hour (I'm feeling really lazy today), and there is a 2 mph crosswind. How much wind do I feel? Hint: it ain't 2 mph and it ain't 4 mph either. Vectors are your friends in this case.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2017, 12:37 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:35 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 12:10 PM)Naielis Wrote:  What property of physical reality could you change to make the statement 2+2=4 false?

I'm riding my bike at 2 miles per hour (I'm feeling really lazy today), and there is a 2 mph crosswind. How much wind do I feel? Hint: it ain't 2 mph and it ain't 4 mph either. Vectors are your friends in this case.

You don't know how to ride a bike. checkmate atheist.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
07-02-2017, 12:38 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:04 PM)Heath_Tierney Wrote:  I'm truly sorry, Naielis, but it's abundantly clear through your repeated fact-free assertions that you really don't know what you're talking about. And when presented with rational, cogent arguments that run counter to your biases, you dismiss them.

That's not the hallmark of intelligent discourse.

Over/out.

I've come to a similar conclusion but mine includes the word troll.

Continuing with the conversation seems pointless, Naielis is either not grasping the meaning of the repeated counters and dismantling of his baseless assertions or is trolling, could there be any other explanation? I suppose the rest of us could be in the wrong and he is the only one who is "right"... nah, that ain't it. Drinking Beverage

“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
07-02-2017, 12:44 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:38 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Continuing with the conversation seems pointless, .....

but but but, I'm learning stuff. Doesn't matter that it's not from nailthis. Smile

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2017, 12:45 PM (This post was last modified: 07-02-2017 12:54 PM by Deesse23.)
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:10 PM)Naielis Wrote:  What property of physical reality could you change to make the statement 2+2=4 false?
Actually i dont have to change physical reality at all. 2+2=11! 9+9=12! 11+11=110!

and guess what...i am correct!

This demonstrates that you are as sloppy in your philosophical blathering as in your statements about math.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: