Too Many Big Words
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-06-2015, 01:38 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
...don't mind me.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 03:13 PM (This post was last modified: 12-06-2015 03:17 PM by kingschosen.)
RE: Too Many Big Words
True Scotsman, in the subject of full disclosure, I believe you're being disingenuous.

I believe this is the quote in question (if not, please point it out to me... because I searched the whole topic):

Quote:Wow, that sure is a lot of words. Observing a stapler, imagining it could change. Imagining food in your cupboard and on and on. All this consciousness and existence, conscious or existence.

It's all written so eloquently too. All those big words, "primacy" "axiom of existence"

However, the intellect of some egg head talking about staplers, existence related to consciousness and does not prove there is no God. You cannot prove such a thing. And, like you said "That existence has primacy is undeniable". It is possible for something to exist without us being aware.

Well some people aren't aware. But I am. God exists. It's not for me to prove that He does. It's for others to prove that He doesn't. This "mental gymnastic philosophy" may impress some. To me it's just arrogant rants by self perceived intellectuals.

He in no way says that your argument is invalid because of the words you're using. He just said that you use big words to sound smarter than you are.

I like you and everything, but I'm calling a spade a spade here. Sorry, bud.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 03:39 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(12-06-2015 09:11 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(12-06-2015 08:52 AM)Worom Wrote:  Right and with that axiom the argument appears immune to begging the question. A theist trying to turn the argument into a proof for their god would fail as they don't have an axiom they can fall upon that I know of. What I found the most interesting in the thread in the christian forum where you used the argument they relentlessly attacked either premise one or two. They kept trying to deny the axiom of primacy of existence principle, essentially denying that existence exists.

I of course could be wrong, and i'm open to counter opinions as well

Actually they do have an axiom at the base of their belief. They start with the axiom of consciousness and this is the fatal flaw. It commits not only the stolen concept fallacy by proposing a consciousness without existence (objects) But also the fallacy of pure self reference by proposing a consciousness which references only its own referencing. This is the fatal flaw of theism, that it rests on the primacy of consciousness. This is why the argument from primacy of existence is so absolutely devastating to theism.

Only if one deliberately conflates human consciousness with divine consciousness. Which any competent theologian is careful not to do.

You can't argue their feels with your feels and expect to accomplish anything.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 03:48 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(12-06-2015 03:13 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  True Scotsman, in the subject of full disclosure, I believe you're being disingenuous.

I believe this is the quote in question (if not, please point it out to me... because I searched the whole topic):

Quote:Wow, that sure is a lot of words. Observing a stapler, imagining it could change. Imagining food in your cupboard and on and on. All this consciousness and existence, conscious or existence.

It's all written so eloquently too. All those big words, "primacy" "axiom of existence"

However, the intellect of some egg head talking about staplers, existence related to consciousness and does not prove there is no God. You cannot prove such a thing. And, like you said "That existence has primacy is undeniable". It is possible for something to exist without us being aware.

Well some people aren't aware. But I am. God exists. It's not for me to prove that He does. It's for others to prove that He doesn't. This "mental gymnastic philosophy" may impress some. To me it's just arrogant rants by self perceived intellectuals.

He in no way says that your argument is invalid because of the words you're using. He just said that you use big words to sound smarter than you are.

I like you and everything, but I'm calling a spade a spade here. Sorry, bud.
That was the only Criticism he offered. That fancy language didn't disprove god. That's how I took it.

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
12-06-2015, 05:34 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(12-06-2015 03:39 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(12-06-2015 09:11 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  Actually they do have an axiom at the base of their belief. They start with the axiom of consciousness and this is the fatal flaw. It commits not only the stolen concept fallacy by proposing a consciousness without existence (objects) But also the fallacy of pure self reference by proposing a consciousness which references only its own referencing. This is the fatal flaw of theism, that it rests on the primacy of consciousness. This is why the argument from primacy of existence is so absolutely devastating to theism.

Only if one deliberately conflates human consciousness with divine consciousness. Which any competent theologian is careful not to do.

You can't argue their feels with your feels and expect to accomplish anything.

I'm not arguing feels against feels. I'm arguing a directly observable, axiomatic truth with an imaginary supernatural consciousness. There is no example of a supernatural conscious to conflate it with Human consciousness. And it's not just Human consciousness that confirms the POE. It is every consciousness.

Besides that the argument has specifically to do with the relationship between the subject of consciousness and the objects of consciousness, not the form of consciousness. Since the objects of consciousness can not have primacy and not have primacy at the same time the theists who point out that our consciousness does not have primacy but God's does are trying to have their cake and eat it too.

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
12-06-2015, 06:56 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(12-06-2015 05:34 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  I'm not arguing feels against feels. I'm arguing a directly observable, axiomatic truth with an imaginary supernatural consciousness.

Asserting things to be axiomatic and self-evident is arguing feels.

Presupposing something to be imaginary is just as presuppositional as presupposing it to be real. You need to define your terms before you even get that far...

(12-06-2015 05:34 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  There is no example of a supernatural conscious to conflate it with Human consciousness. And it's not just Human consciousness that confirms the POE. It is every consciousness.

Prove it.
(in the absence of other directly observable consciousnesses, you may find that difficult - and you literally affirm this, so I'm not sure how you can then make a universal generalisation based only on contingent and limited experience)

(12-06-2015 05:34 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Besides that the argument has specifically to do with the relationship between the subject of consciousness and the objects of consciousness, not the form of consciousness. Since the objects of consciousness can not have primacy and not have primacy at the same time the theists who point out that our consciousness does not have primacy but God's does are trying to have their cake and eat it too.

Logical constructs are descriptive, not proscriptive. And whatever obtains within the universe need not apply without.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-06-2015, 07:27 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(12-06-2015 07:20 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  
(10-06-2015 08:46 AM)Chas Wrote:  Sorry, no. #4 is simply begging the question. It assumes the conclusion.

I don't think so Chas. If this argument begs the question then so does the classic Socrates is mortal syllogism. "man" and "mortal" are both synonymous with Human so they are synonymous with each other. In the same way, "imaginary" and "unreal" are synonymous. But I'm definitely open to persuasion here.

What do the rest of you think. Does the second argument's 4th premise beg the question where the the second premise of the Socrates is mortal syllogism doesn't and why?

Statement 4 assumes that which is to be concluded. "Mortal" is not synonymous with "man".

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
13-06-2015, 04:16 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(08-06-2015 06:54 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Christian just told me that my argument used too many big words so it's invalid. Priceless!
Facepalm Big words like "hermeneutics"? I never heard of that one until some theist pulled it on me. They have others. Rolleyes

Sapere aude
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2015, 07:38 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(13-06-2015 04:16 PM)f stop Wrote:  
(08-06-2015 06:54 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  Christian just told me that my argument used too many big words so it's invalid. Priceless!

Facepalm Big words like "hermeneutics"? I never heard of that one until some theist pulled it on me. They have others. Rolleyes

That shit sounds like a bit a scam medicine...

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free Thought's post
13-06-2015, 10:54 PM
RE: Too Many Big Words
(09-06-2015 09:19 AM)LostLegend Wrote:  
(09-06-2015 07:53 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  Here's a link to the thread if anyone wants to follow it.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/f...l.7891735/

I had to stop reading at this point :

As a Christian, my belief is fundamentally based on one truth- the truth spoke in the bible. And in that truth, God is infallible.
The issue I take with some science is that it argues that truth.
My belief in God is simply stronger than belief in a scientific theory.



Facepalm

Yea that pretty much puts a bow on it. Wow.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: