Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Sudden Dawn of the Cosmos and the Constancy of Physical Laws
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 127 of 244 (888432)
09-18-2021 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Christian7
09-17-2021 7:50 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
Let us consider your syllogisms - or just the first since the others don’t add anything.
quote:
A: Every non-miraculous occurrence in the universe makes sense according to meaning and logic.
B: This would not be true if there were no minds to observe them.
C: Therefore, at least one mind exist for the universe to make sense according to meaning and logic.
D: Therefore, if no minds existed, the universe would not make sense according to meaning and logic.
A is not known to be true (at the least it has required a lot of investigation to make sense of many things and some are still not understood)
B seems to be very likely false - certainly there is no good reason to believe it or to think that the mere existence of an observer could force the universe to “make sense according to reason and logic”
Further if minds must themselves “make sense according to reason and logic” (and I would suggest that they do at least as much as the universe does) then your argument creates a vicious circularity.
Indeed all you can say for B is that in the absence of an observer there would be nobody to make sense of the universe - but that does not suggest that the observer makes the universe behave differently at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 7:50 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 6:46 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 129 of 244 (888435)
09-18-2021 6:46 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by Christian7
09-18-2021 6:33 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
I'm talking about when it's not the behavior of apples, but a clear violation of math and logic. From now on, I will just say logic, (although I'm not sure if we can say that math is a form of logic. What do you think)?
Modern mathematics can certainly be seen that way, but that gets away from the utilitarian origins.
But logic keeps things simpler.
quote:
But not every mind needs to understand the universe; but the universe must make sense according to meaning and logic, otherwise it is violating the laws of meaning and logic, in whatever mind is capable of understanding it. Therefore, seeing the universe cannot violate these laws, it must make sense according to meaning and logic, and therefore one mind must exist for the universe to exist.
You’re just repeating your assumptions without explaining again. If changing language doesn’t change reality then surely the sensible belief is that language is a tool that we use to describe reality rather than something which governs it.
So again, why should the existence of a mind make a difference? There doesn’t seem to be any reason to think so other than your assumptions about how logic works. But there’s no good reason to believe this either.
If the truths of logic are necessary truths then there is no need for logic to “govern” anything. Reality must conform to logic because it is literally impossible for it not to. And when we consider the fact that logical truths are tautologous it is easy to see how they are necessarily true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 6:33 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 6:55 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 132 of 244 (888438)
09-18-2021 7:00 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Christian7
09-18-2021 6:46 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
But would you not admit, that things not understood one hundred years ago is now understood, and that things that now are not understood may later be understood?
“May” is not the same as “will”. That the universe might be comprehensible does not mean that it is. We hope that it is, but it is not yet time to say that it is.
quote:
I didn't say that the minds were forcing them. These syllogisms speak nothing of force.
That is just pointless nitpicking. You assert that the existence of minds somehow makes the universe obey the laws of logic. But you can’t give any reason to think that’s true.
quote:
I think God, perhaps, understands his own mind, though we do not. Therefore, there is no problem here.
That is obviously incorrect. “Therefore there is a very real problem here” would be the correct conclusion. After all, you claim that only things “governed by the rules of logic and meaning” make sense.
quote:
If there is no one to observe the universe, then the universe does not make sense, as there is no one to whom it can make sense.
You know it would help if you understood what I said. I pointed out that that is very different from what you claim. This is an equivocation which makes your syllogism invalid.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 6:46 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:11 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 133 of 244 (888439)
09-18-2021 7:04 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Christian7
09-18-2021 6:55 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
When two premise are true, and a conclusions follows from them deductively, the conclusion must be true, necessarily. This is a law of logic. No facts can contradict it. Neither can informal fallacies prove it wrong, for informal fallacies speak of content, not deduction.
Well thank you for agreeing with me. Since this negates your argument that really seems to be it.
quote:
Reality must conform to logic, and yet is not limited by logic?
It isn’t meaningfully limited by logic for the reasons you give above, I.e it is not logic that makes the conclusion true - it is the truth of the premises that does that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 6:55 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:07 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 136 of 244 (888442)
09-18-2021 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by Christian7
09-18-2021 7:07 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
You still have to prove that my premises are false.
I’ve given good reasons to think that they are false. You haven’t given a good reason to think that they are true.
quote:
But it is limited by logic. Therefore, a non-physical reality limits the universe. Logic is not a physical thing.
Simply asserting that I’m wrong is not much of an argument. I repeat my assertion that logic doesn’t impose any limits at all. The truth of the premises - which will involve physical reality to at least the same extent the conclusion does - is what makes the conclusion true,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:07 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:38 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 137 of 244 (888443)
09-18-2021 7:23 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Christian7
09-18-2021 7:11 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
No, I said that, the universe cannot obey the laws of meaning and logic without the existence of a mind.
I don’t think that a different phrasing of essentially the same statement is a very important issue.
But what is important is that you provide some reason to think that your assertion is true - because it seems to be obviously false.
quote:
God does not have to obey the laws of logic. Therefore this does not apply to Him.
So God doesn’t make any sense at all. That’s fine, it just makes your argument even more nonsensical. But that is hardly my problem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:11 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:46 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 141 of 244 (888447)
09-18-2021 7:47 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by Christian7
09-18-2021 7:38 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
If it is the truth of the premise that makes the conclusion true, then the universe must conform to what our symbolic manipulation tells us; and if this is the case, then what it tells us actually limits the universe.
Obviously false. Since logical truths are tautologous, our symbolic manipulations control nothing, they only let us work out what is independently true. So logic imposes no limitations at all. The conclusion is true regardless of logic.
Equally this shows that the presence of an observer is unnecessary. A tautology will be true regardless of the presence of a mind to identify it as being true,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:38 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:51 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 143 of 244 (888449)
09-18-2021 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by Christian7
09-18-2021 7:46 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
Why shouldn't God make sense?
I didn’t say that God didn’t make sense - I just pointed out that was what you were claiming.
quote:
Just because God does not have to obey the laws of logic doesn't mean He makes no sense at al
So you are now claiming that things that “violate the laws of meaning and logic” can make sense. OK. Since you now assert that your syllogism is unsound you’d better stop using it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:46 AM Christian7 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 144 of 244 (888450)
09-18-2021 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 142 by Christian7
09-18-2021 7:51 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
Why must they be true?
Because the conclusion is contained in the premises. Asserting the truth of the premises is asserting the truth of the conclusion. Logic only helps us see truths that are already there. As I said, it’s a mental tool,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 7:51 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 8:11 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 146 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 8:14 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 148 of 244 (888454)
09-18-2021 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Christian7
09-18-2021 8:11 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
True or false: The universe conforms to what our logic tells us when the arguments are sound?
I’ll work harder at getting you to understand rather than leave you caught in the traps of your assumptions.
True or false: if something is true, it’s true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 8:11 AM Christian7 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 149 of 244 (888455)
09-18-2021 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Christian7
09-18-2021 8:14 AM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
But why does the universe have to be such that our logic, which does not allow everything, proves what it true about the universe, the universe being limited, even as the rules of logic demonstrate this limit?
Because what is true, is true. Is that really so hard to understand?
quote:
There is a correlation between the limits of the universe and the limits of what logic permits.
I have yet to see any meaningful limit imposed by logic in the universe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 8:14 AM Christian7 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 176 of 244 (888482)
09-18-2021 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Christian7
09-18-2021 4:39 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
For me to know something it must be true.
For me to know something I must be certain.
I don't need evidence to know something as long as what I believe is true.
Therefore, knowledge is certainty of truth, regardless of evidence.
Then in fact you don’t care about whether anything really is true. To count something as knowledge you just need to be certain of it - without even a good reason for that certainty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 4:39 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 180 of 244 (888487)
09-18-2021 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Christian7
09-15-2021 8:50 PM


Re: Another YAWN topic
I missed this because it was a reply to a message written 4 years ago,
So, you address the fact that:
Which is why the world came to an end in the 2nd Century BC (Daniel). And the 1st Century AD (the Gospels)
With a quote from Romans that doesn’t directly address either point and with no explanation. Which is hardly a good answer.
quote:
Where does it say that in Leviticus?
My apologies. The correct reference is Deuteronomy 18:22
If a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord but the thing does not take place or prove true, it is a word that the Lord has not spoken.
(NRSV)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Christian7, posted 09-15-2021 8:50 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 6:48 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 188 of 244 (888496)
09-19-2021 2:03 AM
Reply to: Message 181 by Christian7
09-18-2021 6:48 PM


Re: Another YAWN topic
So you say:
quote:
There is no contradiction.
Then you repeat the quote from Deuteronomy, an irrelevant quote from Ezekiel and a quote from Jonah that contradicts Deuteronomy. You don’t even bother to address Jeremiah,
All without explanation.
What’s the point of that?
[ABE]
Oh wait a minute I think I see it!
The Ezekiel verses contradict Deuteronomy, too - at least as you’re reading them.
So you’ve added two more contradictions of Deuteronomy.
The math is 1 + 1 + 1 = 0 - a clever denial of the Trinity.
It really needs more explanation but it really is quite a clever bit of anti-Christian work.
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Christian7, posted 09-18-2021 6:48 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by Christian7, posted 09-19-2021 10:02 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 190 of 244 (888498)
09-19-2021 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by Christian7
09-19-2021 10:02 AM


Re: Another YAWN topic
quote:
This might sound a little nuts, as I've found no support for this in any doctrinal online source, but when I looked at the Hebrew word for "shall be overthrown" in the strong's concordance, I found that although one meaning of it is overthrow, another is change, another is turn. I'm not sure about the usage of this Hebrew word, or the meaning of the definition. But is it possible that this prophecy was an pun, of which either interpretation could have been true depending upon the Ninevites response?
Jonah 3:10 is quite clear:
10 When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil ways, God changed his mind about the calamity that he had said he would bring upon them; and he did not do it.
(NRSV)
So, no.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by Christian7, posted 09-19-2021 10:02 AM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Christian7, posted 09-19-2021 11:18 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024