The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-02-2017, 02:03 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
At work.

I know the thread is moving fast.... BUT......

Naielis? The point? You've missed it a couple of times now. Yes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
07-02-2017, 02:03 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 02:00 PM)Naielis Wrote:  You haven't even engaged the arguments.

Of course not.

[Image: 40812-Lifes-Too-Short-To-Bullshit.gif]

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
07-02-2017, 02:04 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:00 PM)Naielis Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 11:56 AM)Chas Wrote:  And I do not.

Mathematics is a way to describe aspects of reality. If reality were different, then the math would different.

Physical reality is what we have. The rest is commentary. And woo.

I completely disagree. If the physical world operated differently, that wouldn't make 2+2=4. Mathematical truth is necessary truth. It cannot be otherwise. If it were otherwise, we would exist in an incoherent reality.

2 + 2 = 5
http://www.quora.com/What-does-Lawrence-...says-2+2-5

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-02-2017, 02:04 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 02:03 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

I know the thread is moving fast.... BUT......

Naielis? The point? You've missed it a couple of times now. Yes

You're always at work.

Mate, take a sickie. Wink

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Banjo's post
07-02-2017, 02:05 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 12:44 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(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

Me too. Here you Girly have a

[Image: Real_Bear_Hug.jpg]

no hobo!

[Image: hobostick11.jpg]

“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
07-02-2017, 02:09 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 02:02 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 01:57 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Your arguments are wrong, Naielis.

You cannot get around this.

Why are they wrong? is the question. I would argue that they are valid but unsound. The rules of inference are used properly but the premises are neither self-evident nor incontrovertible. In fact they're rather silly. This is where a lot of theistic arguments find themselves confused, they mistake validity for soundness. Validity is just a matter of proper syntax and being grammatically correct. It has nothing to do with whether the premises conflict with observation.

Exactly, yes. That's what I've been saying - even granting that the definitions are coherent, they cannot be demonstrated to actually apply.

"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
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
07-02-2017, 02:10 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 02:00 PM)Naielis Wrote:  You haven't even engaged the arguments.

I'm feeling very much ignored over here.

"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
07-02-2017, 02:11 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 01:57 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 01:46 PM)Naielis Wrote:  I don't think it derails the conversation. I think it's a necessary question. You have to be able to justify the reliability of your senses if your entire worldview relies upon that reliability.

The justification has been made. Multiple times. And I'm only referring to myself here; I'm sure others have dealt with it as well.

You just keep bringing it up, the same way you keep trying to bring up Aquinas' idiocy, or Anselm's, or any variants upon their arguments. All of the variations of the cosmological and ontological arguments have the same fundamental flaw (inability to demonstrate that their definitions actually apply to anything). All pseudo-solipsistic questions of sensory fallibility have the same fundamental flaw (their inherently semantic nature).

It isn't just that the conversation has moved on. Philosophy has moved on. None of these "arguments" are considered at all relevant any more, and haven't been for centuries. The only people - I repeat, the only people - who still take them at all seriously are explicitly theistic philosophers who don't want to let go of them because they're one of the few vaguely "official" and "intellectual" things they can produce in defense of their position.

This is not atheistic bias. This is simple fact.

Your arguments are wrong, Naielis.

You cannot get around this.

I'm not sure philosophy has left these questions behind. But let's get more into the arguments you gave against the cosmological argument. Are you saying contingency and necessity don't apply to the real world? What about truths? Is it not necessary that some things be true? Could it be possible, for example, that the law of noncontradiction be false or is that something that is true in all coherent worlds? Then you say the solipsistic questions are purely semantic. Could you elaborate? Is there an answer to the questions? Are you saying they're incoherent or malformed?

"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, 02:12 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 02:10 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 02:00 PM)Naielis Wrote:  You haven't even engaged the arguments.

I'm feeling very much ignored over here.

[Image: 3374930a0df09725c88522c64a67dbb7.jpg]

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
07-02-2017, 02:12 PM
RE: The Cosmological Arguments Haven't Been Debunked
(07-02-2017 02:10 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(07-02-2017 02:00 PM)Naielis Wrote:  You haven't even engaged the arguments.

I'm feeling very much ignored over here.

Sorry I'm at school right now and I'm trying to type out full responses to your posts. I like that you are willing to engage the arguments more than some others.

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: