The Dawkins Scale
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-08-2015, 11:38 AM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 11:15 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(19-08-2015 10:19 AM)Stevil Wrote:  No, you are taking the analogy too far.

It is precisely what the analogy says. Again, in case you missed it:

"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?"

It's a simple question. If you disagree with the answer given - that the dragon does not exist - then present your argument for it. Show a meaningful way in which the garage dragon can be said to exist.

In some functional situation where it unfolds that our lives are mere simulations and ideas thought up can be formed out or created by some material machine.

Is this the case of our existence, not that it seems. Do I know for absolute certainty? No, I'd stay at a undefinable stance on that issue. It doesn't change anything but I can't actually say I do know for certain that it isn't the case.

That's my issue or stance that always comes up from these scale/positional questions. Can we prove we aren't brains in a vat? We actually can't, but it doesn't matter. Though we can't actually claim absolute knowledge on the subject even though nothing changes if we could or couldn't know.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2015, 11:55 AM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 11:38 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  In some functional situation where it unfolds that our lives are mere simulations and ideas thought up can be formed out or created by some material machine.

Ignoring for the moment the fact that I have addressed the problem of solipsism before - it is, itself, another garage dragon - that still doesn't give any sort of meaningful existence to the garage 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
19-08-2015, 12:04 PM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
This thread is beginning to resemble a discussion between theologians over some obscure (probably mistranslated) piece of scripture.

Dodgy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like DLJ's post
19-08-2015, 12:10 PM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 11:55 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(19-08-2015 11:38 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  In some functional situation where it unfolds that our lives are mere simulations and ideas thought up can be formed out or created by some material machine.

Ignoring for the moment the fact that I have addressed the problem of solipsism before - it is, itself, another garage dragon - that still doesn't give any sort of meaningful existence to the garage dragon.

I would probably enjoy seeing that old topic then or something of it's nature but I also recall you having deterministic positions which may coincide with that situation.

Though what constitutes a "meaningful" existence. I don't think I get it then, because if you merely are attached to a simulation that can create an imaginational being and form it to the reality you accept as the normal existence. What about that now created garage dragon isn't existing meaningfully?

Of course it's all hippie dippy bullshit but it's also a hard line to cross to my point of view. You can say of course we have so much pilled up logic and information to rule it out but in the abstract thought, but there to me there is a larger leap in stating you have absolute certainty than what absolute certainty as a position even amounts to. What's more meaningless to me is claiming to "know"

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2015, 12:19 PM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I would probably enjoy seeing that old topic then or something of it's nature

It was earlier in this thread.

(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Though what constitutes a "meaningful" existence.

Being able to say "the garage dragon exists" and have the definition of "exists" you are using actually function properly. That is, using a definition that includes all things that exist, but does not open the door to strictly imaginary entities.

Which you can't do.

(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I don't think I get it then, because if you merely are attached to a simulation that can create an imaginational being and form it to the reality you accept as the normal existence. What about that now created garage dragon isn't existing meaningfully?

If you poof an actual dragon out of thin air, that dragon is detectable. It is not a garage dragon.

(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Of course it's all hippie dippy bullshit but it's also a hard line to cross to my point of view. You can say of course we have so much pilled up logic and information to rule it out but in the abstract thought, but there to me there is a larger leap in stating you have absolute certainty than what absolute certainty as a position even amounts to. What's more meaningless to me is claiming to "know"

I feel like you left out some sentences here. I'm not sure what you're saying.

"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
19-08-2015, 12:21 PM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 10:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  Your examples and arguments aren't even close to the dragon-in-the-garage that Sagan argues.
You are focused too much on the analogy and have lost sight of the points that Carl was making.
There is no reason to limit Carl's point to dealing with claims of magical things.
His point applies to much more than that
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2015, 12:41 PM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 12:21 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(19-08-2015 10:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  Your examples and arguments aren't even close to the dragon-in-the-garage that Sagan argues.
You are focused too much on the analogy and have lost sight of the points that Carl was making.

Then perhaps you can tell us what the answer to Carl's own question is?

"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?"

"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
19-08-2015, 12:47 PM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 12:41 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(19-08-2015 12:21 PM)Stevil Wrote:  You are focused too much on the analogy and have lost sight of the points that Carl was making.

Then perhaps you can tell us what the answer to Carl's own question is?

"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?"

It is meaningless to say the dragon exists, isn't it?

Is there some other answer?

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free's post
19-08-2015, 12:49 PM (This post was last modified: 19-08-2015 01:03 PM by ClydeLee.)
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 12:19 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I would probably enjoy seeing that old topic then or something of it's nature

It was earlier in this thread.

(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Though what constitutes a "meaningful" existence.

Being able to say "the garage dragon exists" and have the definition of "exists" you are using actually function properly. That is, using a definition that includes all things that exist, but does not open the door to strictly imaginary entities.

Which you can't do.

(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I don't think I get it then, because if you merely are attached to a simulation that can create an imaginational being and form it to the reality you accept as the normal existence. What about that now created garage dragon isn't existing meaningfully?

If you poof an actual dragon out of thin air, that dragon is detectable. It is not a garage dragon.

(19-08-2015 12:10 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Of course it's all hippie dippy bullshit but it's also a hard line to cross to my point of view. You can say of course we have so much pilled up logic and information to rule it out but in the abstract thought, but there to me there is a larger leap in stating you have absolute certainty than what absolute certainty as a position even amounts to. What's more meaningless to me is claiming to "know"

I feel like you left out some sentences here. I'm not sure what you're saying.

I was forgetting the incorporeal elements of it, I get it now. Even creating it would make no difference to it not existing and creating a real dragon wouldn't be the "garage dragon"

But I wasn't trying to say anything more in the end. Just that I think it's a pointless and unreasonable to proclaim absolute knowledge upon most things. Even when all logically practical scenarios discount it. Things with vary established parameters sure, like my forum name on here is ClydeLee sure I have absolute knowledge of that. Certain tautologies sure, but random things I know in reality I wouldn't say I am absolutely certain about them.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2015, 12:53 PM
RE: The Dawkins Scale
(19-08-2015 12:47 PM)Free Wrote:  It is meaningless to say the dragon exists, isn't it?

Is there some other answer?

That's exactly it. The garage dragon doesn't exist. Saying that it's there anyway is a meaningless statement. It is the logical equivalent of saying that something is blue, but red anyway. It does not parse. It is nonsense, meaningless, and untrue.

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: