Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
122 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, nwr (3 members, 119 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,057 Year: 6,169/6,534 Month: 362/650 Week: 132/278 Day: 30/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Simplified Proof That The Universe Cannot Be Explained
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 5 of 342 (784257)
05-15-2016 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Percy
05-15-2016 9:06 AM


How does it follow that an event with no cause has no explanation?

Because explaining it would be the same as saying what caused it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Percy, posted 05-15-2016 9:06 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 7 of 342 (784260)
05-15-2016 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Modulous
05-15-2016 10:11 AM


However, the answer might be ‘There is no alternative to there being something’.

Ooh, ooh, I though of an alternative: there not being anything. That would work.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 10:11 AM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 12:29 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 9 of 342 (784262)
05-15-2016 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Modulous
05-15-2016 12:29 PM


Well, for there to be necessary entities, a state where there were no entities would have to involve a contradiction in terms. But how? It could not involve a state where there was some x for which P(x) and ~P(x), because there would not, in fact, be some x.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 12:29 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 12:54 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 11 of 342 (784264)
05-15-2016 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Modulous
05-15-2016 12:54 PM


To prove that the universe 'Cannot Be Explained' therefore, means proving no necessary entities exist.

I thought I just did that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 12:54 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 1:39 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 13 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 1:48 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 16 of 342 (784270)
05-15-2016 7:15 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Modulous
05-15-2016 1:48 PM


Here is the proof FOR necessary entities

Imagine a world where there are only contingent entities. Since all entities are explained in terms of other entities, this implies either an infinite regression or a circularity of causation. Each of these explanatory entities, is necessary. A necessary entity contradicts the statement there are only contingent entities. Therefore there cannot be contingent only entities

Imagine a world were there were no entities. Then there would not be any contingent entities, so there would be no need of necessary entities to explain them.

Each of these explanatory entities, is necessary.

Not if you could have either: but in any case their necessity is in fact contingent. What you're doing is along the lines of: "Here is a contingent triangle. A triangle necessarily has three sides. Therefore its sides are necessary objects." Well, not if the triangle is contingent: in that case it could have not existed and the sides along with it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 1:48 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 8:10 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 17 of 342 (784271)
05-15-2016 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Modulous
05-15-2016 1:39 PM


Sure, you said the word 'state'. State of what?

Can you prove it is possible for a 'state' of 'no entities' to 'exist'?

Again, I thought I'd done this.

To show that necessarily something exists would be to demonstrate that there is a contradiction that can be derived from the statement "there are no things that exist". (Otherwise it would not be necessarily false.) But how can there be a contradiction where there are no objects to form propositions about? There can't, can there? For a contradiction would involve asserting and denying that the existence of an object having a given predicate, the existence of two objects standing in a given relation, etc. But if you think you can frame such a proposition, have at it.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 1:39 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 7:49 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 27 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 3:36 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 19 of 342 (784273)
05-15-2016 8:00 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Modulous
05-15-2016 7:49 PM


I don't know enough about the nature of reality or the nature of existence to tell you if a contradiction exists between these concepts and the concept of 'no thing existing'. But I don't need to since I'm only proposing that this needs to be established before the proof in the OP gets off the ground.

Well, I seem to have established it. Unless you have a rebuttal to my argument.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 7:49 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 8:14 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 25 of 342 (784284)
05-16-2016 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Modulous
05-15-2016 8:14 PM


Yes. You have failed to provide confirmation that it is possible for no entities to exist according to the reality we are in.

Well of course entities exist in the reality that we are in. But I have demonstrated that they do not exist as a matter of logical necessity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 8:14 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Modulous, posted 05-16-2016 1:37 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 26 of 342 (784285)
05-16-2016 12:35 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Modulous
05-15-2016 8:10 PM


Well that proves how things are in an imaginary world.

And to prove that the opposite was necessary, you would have to show that things couldn't be like that in an imaginary world.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Modulous, posted 05-15-2016 8:10 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 29 of 342 (784297)
05-16-2016 8:25 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by bluegenes
05-16-2016 3:36 AM


The statement necessarily contradicts itself. There are no things that exist, therefore there are no statements that exist.

Huh?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 3:36 AM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 10:59 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 32 of 342 (784306)
05-16-2016 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by bluegenes
05-16-2016 10:59 AM


However, surely any reality is something and it's necessary that there is one ...

Why?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 10:59 AM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 1:39 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 35 of 342 (784310)
05-16-2016 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by bluegenes
05-16-2016 1:39 PM


Why is it necessary? Because its opposite can't be real.

I concede that unreality can't be real.

Nonexistence, on the other hand, can.

If someone told you that unicorns must exist because the unreality of unicorns can't be real, would you buy it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 1:39 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Percy, posted 05-16-2016 2:48 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 38 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 3:23 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 37 of 342 (784315)
05-16-2016 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Percy
05-16-2016 2:48 PM


Quite. Things exist or don't exist, propositions are true or untrue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Percy, posted 05-16-2016 2:48 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 39 of 342 (784318)
05-16-2016 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by bluegenes
05-16-2016 3:23 PM


Non-existence can't exist itself ...

Can the non-existence of unicorns exist?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by bluegenes, posted 05-16-2016 3:23 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Percy, posted 05-16-2016 5:15 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 51 by bluegenes, posted 05-17-2016 5:23 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 365 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 43 of 342 (784324)
05-16-2016 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Percy
05-16-2016 5:15 PM


It's hard to stay in sync in discussions like this. I thought we agreed when you said, "Things exist or don't exist, propositions are true or untrue," but if your question about "the non-existence of unicorns" implies it's a thing rather than a proposition then I probably misunderstood you.

No, I'm implying that it would be silly for that to be a thing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Percy, posted 05-16-2016 5:15 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022