|
Author
|
Topic: Logic
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logic can be moot itself
i like this bit.
BUT WHAT IF the God of the bible is true??? That means that logic is irrelevant
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 5 by mike the wiz, posted 04-29-2005 5:38 PM | | mike the wiz has replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
My position of faith is far more logical than the evo atheist/agnostos here. They often remind me that if another religion is true, then mine isn't. Thus the wiz speaks; well, that's a fallacy of false dilemmas, on their account. unless one's religion claims to be the only true one, and thus the dilemma is imposed by the religion itself and not debater. see, if that's the case, if another religion is true, then the religion that says "no other religion is true" is false, and therefore that religion cannot be entirely true.
I don't know how many religions thre are. Let's say there are 100 for arguments sake. I believe in 1, not 99. You believe in 0, not 100. Only 1 can be true, and 99 not true, or 100 not true. We cannot know as to whether all are untrue, but LOGICALLY we CAN know that 99 are untrue. I don't believe in 99. So logically I'm one better off than Shraff. yes, well, see, the trick is to know which 1 is right, right? whether the odds are 1 in 100 or 0 in 100, you're still roughly as good off as one of the 99 that are wrong. the odds become even worse as the numbers get bigger.
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 7 by mike the wiz, posted 04-29-2005 8:07 PM | | mike the wiz has not replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
|
Message 11 of 110 (203888)
04-30-2005 3:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 10 by mikehager
04-29-2005 11:33 PM
|
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
Of the two positions, "All X are F" and "Of X, X-1 are F and 1 is T", which is the more logical? I leave that question to the public, and especially to MTW. if this were a probability test, past results would not affect probability of future results, so you can't count on a trend. and if you get one right one and stop, the limit as x -> infiniti would yeild 1. any sufficiently large number of religions would be bound to yeild one true one eventually, even if the chances themselves do get smaller and smaller. right?
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 10 by mikehager, posted 04-29-2005 11:33 PM | | mikehager has replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
|
|
Message 18 of 110 (204237)
05-02-2005 4:39 AM
|
Reply to: Message 13 by mikehager
04-30-2005 3:55 AM
|
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
It's a bit of a trick question. no, i know, but it was a bit of an attempt to actually provide a valid answer. logically, the chance of one religion being correct does get smaller and smaller. however, with exceptionally large numbers, presumably one would be correct. however, the trick part: we don't know if religions are right in their claim that no other religion is right. they might not be. and we don't know if one CAN be right at all. there's not really enough information. we don't really even know if logic may be applied to something that is essentially out of the realm of naturalism by definition...
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 13 by mikehager, posted 04-30-2005 3:55 AM | | mikehager has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 23 by mikehager, posted 05-02-2005 12:52 PM | | arachnophilia has not replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
I say "logically" because it's the only conclusion we can make; Let's look at it like this; Premise; there are 100 religions Premise; one might be true Premise; none might be true conclusion; 99 cannot be true. doesn't follow. you have to add a fourth premise, "one being true excludes all others." otherwise, two might be true. or even all 100.
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 16 by mike the wiz, posted 04-30-2005 8:04 PM | | mike the wiz has not replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
"I couldn't prove God exists using logic. Therefore, logic is useless." unless of course the babelfish is real.
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 20 by Dan Carroll, posted 05-02-2005 9:43 AM | | Dan Carroll has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 26 by kongstad, posted 10-16-2005 9:52 AM | | arachnophilia has not replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
islam accepts that christianity and judaism recognize the same god (i think i've decided we don't return the favor) but think that our methods are screwy. think of the way some christians often regard jews. that's the way a some muslims regard both christians AND jews. neither is really acceptable within the mainstream religion, or the texts, but it does happen. ideally, islam should easily fit together with christianity and judaism, but it doesn't.
i don't see why pagans wouldn't accept a christian god into their pantheon. because the christian god IS exclusionary. he rules out all other gods.
i think the only religions that are really exclusive, are the big three... you can only be one of those... you can't really be a christian and a jew. it doesn't work. (with jew here representing a religious not a cultural aspect.) you accuse me of being jewish all the time, dear. 
אָרַח
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
bush's strategy in iraq was theoretically flawed. if there's peace in iraq in 20 years, all the better. it doesn't mean he was right; it just means he beat the odds. luck. dumb luck.
אָרַח
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
1. that's what i said. what, you don't think i actually READ what you have to say, do you? (j/k)
2. that's why the christians won't accept pagans not the other way around. what i'm saying is that on yahweh's kindergarten report card, it said "does not play well with others."
3. cause it's funny. גויה
אָרַח
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
rocks have higher iqs. i dunno about that. since rocks are usually pretty old, and don't exhibit a very high mental age on the stanford-binet scale, they tend to have, well, negative iq's. bush, on the other hand, is somewhat capable of pretending to hold a conversation, and seems to be able to read.
אָרַח
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1371 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Logically my position is correct compared to Shraff's
nope, still can't talk. now, parrots...
אָרַח
|
™ Version 4.2