|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why "Immaterial Pink Unicorns" are not a logical argument | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Well precisely. It is evidence. You therefore agree that alien life is evidenced. Why was that so hard? Cognitive dissonance? Just as much as alien visitations? Enjoy by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
RAZD answer me ONE question - Are evidence based hypotheses more, less or equally as reliable as wholly subjective claims?
RAZD writes: Just as much as alien visitations? From Message 242 But try reading the full post rather than just picking apart this quote before coming back to me.
Straggler writes:
EXTRATERRESTRIAL LIFE - THE CASE IN FAVOURSo where does this leave the possibility of alien life? Well the evidential basis is absolutely undeniable. We KNOW that life exists on this planet. We also KNOW that there are other planets in the universe. Thus a minimal (if even present) degree of interpretation of evidence leads to the logically inevitable question of the possibility of life on other planets. It is that simple. The question of life on other planets is derived from just about the most evidentially founded and logically inevitable possibility one could think of. Whatever factors may influence the probability of alien life existing the evidential and logical root of the possibility of this directly unevidenced phenomenon are absolutely undeniable. Thus our specified criteria have been met: Criteria writes: 1) The strength of the evidential foundation.2) The degree to which subjective interpretation is required and/or possible. THE UFO QUESTIONRAZD keeps asking me about UFOs in a manner that suggests that he finds my conclusion regarding the unlikelihood of UFO visitations to be inconsistent and irrational as compared to my acceptance of the possibility of extraterrestrial life. So let's look at the evidence and logic required to conclude that visitations to Earth by alien spacecraft are probable in relation to the above argument. Well firstly there is no objective verifiable empirical evidence that suggests alien spacecraft have visited the planet Earth that I am aware of. To my knowledge all the evidence in favour of alien visitations consists of subjective experience. Thus I would suggest that the evidential foundation is extremely weak. But if there is empirical evidence of UFO visitations how much subjective interpretation is required to conclude alien visitation rather than the various other possibilities? I would suggest that the answer is a great deal. Thus the question of UFOs fails by the specified criteria. Criteria writes: 1) The strength of the evidential foundation.2) The degree to which subjective interpretation is required and/or possible
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
RAZD thinks the IPU equally applies to alien life and nobody else seems to think that is the case. Nearly half way through, and people are still missing the basic point: The issue is that the question of alien life is NOT equivalent to the IPU argument, and that any argument claiming they are comparable involves a logical fallacy or two. Hint: the title is Why "Immaterial Pink Unicorns" are not a logical argument
"Why do you have faith in the Garage Dragon, and not the IPU?", comes the response. LOL, I thought you said my presentation of the IPU argument was a straw man. Perhaps it is time to repeat the opening argument:
quote: We have now added the concept of alien visitations to earth to the list of things that have no (convincing, direct) evidence pro or con, and we see people equivocating on the answer to alien life:
The term "special pleading" comes to mind. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
When I experience love, I cannot explain it, or show any objective evidence for it, quantify it or make predictions based on it, and if I tell you about it, you will not able to reproduce the love I experience. Don't give us the "love argument". Love does not exist distinctly or seperately to those who experience it. Love did not exist before conscious beings existed in the universe and it won't exist should the universe become devoid of conscious beings at some point in the future. Love, toe stubbing experiences etc. etc. etc. are not entities that exist independently of conscious beings so unless you agree that deities (and I include the IPU in that term) are just the product of human consciousness with no validity or existence outside of that consciousness they have nothing to do with anything that we are talking about. Nothing. Nada. Squat.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Both are based on the same direct evidence: our experience of life on earth, the known numbers of planets, etc.. The only difference is the degree of extrapolation, not in the kind of extrapolation:
If there is life on earth, then there is a probability of alien life on other planets ... if it is probable on one planet out of 200, then it is more probable as the number of planets is increased. If there is intelligent life on earth, then there is a probability of intelligent alien life on other planets ... if it is probable on one planet out of 200, then it is more probable as the number of planets is increased. If there is space traveling life on earth, then there is a probability of space traveling alien life on other planets ... if it is probable on one planet out of 200, then it is more probable as the number of planets is increased. Further, if there is intelligent alien life, then it is probable that some alien life is more intelligent than humans (and some that is less intelligent than humans) ... and if more intelligent alien life is probable on one planet out of 200, then it is more probable as the number of planets is increased. If there is space traveling life on earth, then there is a probability of space traveling alien life on other planets ... if it is probable on one planet out of 200, then it is more probable as the number of planets is increased. Further, if there is space traveling alien life, then it is probable that some space traveling alien life is more technological advanced than humans (and some that is less technological advanced than humans) ... and if more technological advanced space traveling alien life is probable on one planet out of 200, then it is more probable as the number of planets is increased. Does, or does not, the increase in the number of planets increase the likelihood of alien visitations? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that your argument has been that a logical extrapolation, originally based on direct evidence, is fundamentally different from the IPU, no matter how tenuous the extrapolation from that evidence becomes. Thus, by your argument, the concept of the existence of alien life, and the concept of alien visitations to earth are on the same side of the tenuous extrapolation from our experience with life on earth, while the IPU concept is on the another side. Would you, or would you not, agree that one can make some scientific type predictions about alien visitations, that such visitations could result in occasional sightings of aliens and alien spacecraft? Do you, or do you not, agree that there are records - no matter how anecdotal and prone to error, etc. - of people claiming actual experience of occasional sightings of aliens and alien spacecraft? Do you, or do you not, agree that such claims could also be "indirect evidence" of alien visitations? Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
The issue is that the question of alien life is NOT equivalent to the IPU argument, and that any argument claiming they are comparable involves a logical fallacy or two. Yes, I think all parties agree that the IPU and alien life are not equivalent. So continuing to use alien life as an example of a failed application of the IPU seems a bit...daft, yes? It's not really an issue at all, if we all agree on it. But you seem to think that bringing the alien life issue up is relevant to the argument somehow.
LOL, I thought you said my presentation of the IPU argument was a straw man. That's right I did. You see what you did was take an argument that nobody was making, and attempt to show that it didn't work. We agreed that it didn't work, and we gave reasons as to why the IPU and the existence of alien life are different.
Perhaps it is time to repeat the opening argument You seem to enjoy repeating your position at me. Just answer this: Can you give me a reason to prefer believing in the IPU over the Garage Dragon? Edited by Modulous, : clarifying my opening paragraph
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
You are (perhaps intentionally) confusing and conflating the evidential basis for UFOs having actually visted Earth with the possibility that they could visit Earth.
The first is completely unevidenced in any objective terms I am aware of. The second is a potentially valid scientific hypothesis that involves factors about which I claim nothing but ignorance. The physics of inter-galactic space travel etc. etc. etc. If you want to start a thread on the second then I will happily participate. The former is more than adequately covered by my response here - Message 242 Having had this conflation pointed out to you I trust that you will desist from any further confusion between the two? Edited by Straggler, : Wrong link Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
The issue is that the question of alien life is NOT equivalent to the IPU argument, and that any argument claiming they are comparable involves a logical fallacy or two. Hint: the title is Why "Immaterial Pink Unicorns" are not a logical argument What logical fallacy? Be specific.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2980 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
When I stub my toe in the dark, and then turn on the light, but am unable to determine what I stubbed by toe on, that failure to objectively substantiate the stubbing event does not diminish the experience of having stubbed a toe. This would be similar to Inattentional blindness quote: So the lights don't have to be off for you to objectively not realize that you are about to stub your toe. Yet you will stub it and still not have objective evidence as to what you stubbed it on, even with the lights on, due to the fact that our minds can sometimes see and process information in unusual ways that defy our logic, in hindsight.
When I experience love, I cannot explain it, or show any objective evidence for it, quantify it or make predictions based on it, and if I tell you about it, you will not able to reproduce the love I experience. I think love is an illusionary feature added to biological reproduction. But that will be too off topic. "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2980 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
Hi Straggler,
Love, toe stubbing experiences etc. etc. etc. are not entities that exist independently of conscious beings so unless you agree that deities (and I include the IPU in that term) are just the product of human consciousness with no validity or existence outside of that consciousness they have nothing to do with anything that we are talking about. I think the point RAZD was trying to make to me in that post was that there are experiences that lack objective evidence that we can point to definitively, yet are still experienced in the physical reality. "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
I think the point RAZD was trying to make to me in that post was that there are experiences that lack objective evidence that we can point to definitively, yet are still experienced in the physical reality. And I agree. But what has that to do with the supposed actual existence of gods, deities, Immaterial Pink Unicorn, Wagwah, Face Sucking Jellyfish or any other such inherently undetectable entity?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2980 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
But what has that to do with the supposed actual existence of gods, deities, Immaterial Pink Unicorn, Wagwah, Face Sucking Jellyfish or any other such inherently undetectable entity?
Not a damn thing. This sub-topic spun off of one of my replies to Rrhain. Sorry for the off topic deviation. "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Sorry for the off topic deviation. If it was you and only you I would advocate flogging and hanging. Given that I am also guilty of such discrepancies I will advocate forgiveness and compassion instead. Let he who hath not deviated off topic cast the first (metaphorical) stone. May all your contributions be wise ones.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thanks Mod,
Just answer this: Can you give me a reason to prefer believing in the IPU over the Garage Dragon? Seeing as I've never seen any reason to actually believe in the IPU, it is irrelevant how many other made up entities you raise in the same vein.
Yes, I think all parties agree that the IPU and alien life are not equivalent. So continuing to use alien life as an example of a failed application of the IPU seems a bit...daft, yes? Do you agree that they are both things for with there is no conclusive evidence pro or con? Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
onifre responds to me:
quote: Persistence, consistency, etc. Are we about to wander off into solipsism?
quote: I guess we are, then. Question: Is there anybody else in your world or is it just you? I don't mean that flippantly. I really want to know. Is your philosophical underpinning that only your consciousness can be said to exist and all the others that you experience are in doubt? If we go with the idea that there are other people in the world, that it isn't just you, that there is an external reality that is independent of you, even though you only experience it through your senses, then we can make a distinction between those sensations that seem to happen only to you and those that are more communally acquired.
quote: And thus, we get back to the IPU. Nobody seems to take the IPU seriously. Why the special pleading for theirs?
quote: Huh? Subjective claims aren't evidence of anything. We've gone full circle. Shall we spin the merry go round again?
quote: Solipsism? That's your argument? Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024