Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Omniscience, Omnipotence, the Fall & Logical Contradictions.
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 241 of 354 (490741)
12-08-2008 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 237 by override
12-06-2008 7:03 PM


Hi, Override. Welcome to EvC!
override writes:
Do you mean, that what you do in one room will affect the other room? That if you choose the fruit in on room, you will also choose a fruit in the other room, or if instead you choose the chocolate in one room you will also choose a chocolate in the other room?
It's a circular argument. Mikey used the assumption that we have free will to prove that we have free will. In a situation wherein God does alter our ability to choose, we very well might have chosen the chocolate in one room, and the fruit in the other. But, Mikey asserts that this won't happen, and holds this up as evidence that we have free will.
-----
For new members at EvC:
If you press the "peek" button at the bottom corner of this (or any other) post, you can see the codes that let you make quote boxes and other formatting effects, like these:
Bluejay writes:
Mikey used the assumption that we have free will to prove that we have free will.
or,
quote:
Mikey used the assumption that we have free will to prove that we have free will.
You can do different text colors for emphasis, too.

-Bluejay
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by override, posted 12-06-2008 7:03 PM override has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by override, posted 12-08-2008 12:44 AM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 258 of 354 (510701)
06-02-2009 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by mike the wiz
06-02-2009 5:49 AM


I like chocolate
Hi, Mikey.
mike the wiz writes:
The argument wasn't in the least flawed but is logically sound.
It is absolutely true, that whether God does or does not exist, this will never affect what you choose to eat.
"Logically sound" isn't just a quality that some statement has: it's a description of the methods used to obtain a result. When you say something is "logically sound," you are not simply saying that it makes sense, but that you defined a number of premises, and drew a conclusion from those premises using systematic formulae.
So, what premises are there to your argument that God's existence does not affect a person's decision?
Well, the only premise you have is that God's existence does not affect a person's decision.
Unfortunately, you chose this as your conclusion, also. Whenever your premise and your conclusion are the same thing, your argument is referred to as "circular."
Thus, your argument is not logically sound.
-----
If you wanted to make it logical, you'd have to do more than just make a statement. For instance, let's add a couple premises:
Premise A: God has a health code that forbids the consumption of chocolate.
Premise B: I know that God will strike me down if I defy His health code.
Premise C: I like chocolate
Now, I can do some logic. Given these premises, will my decision to eat chocolate or fruit change, depending on whether or not God exists?
Of course it will: I like chocolate, but, if God exists, He will kill me for eating chocolate. So, I will only eat the chocolate if God does not exist.
That is what a logically sound argument looks like.
Yours is just a statement that "makes sense" to you.
"Makes sense" and "logically sound" are two very different things.
Edited by Bluejay, : Re-formatted list of premises

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by mike the wiz, posted 06-02-2009 5:49 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by mike the wiz, posted 06-17-2009 6:34 AM Blue Jay has replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 264 of 354 (512388)
06-17-2009 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 263 by mike the wiz
06-17-2009 6:34 AM


Re: I like chocolate
Hi, Mikey.
mike the wiz writes:
You're stating a lot of things but proving very little.
I find it ironic that you followed the previous statement with this:
mike the wiz writes:
The burden of proof was never on me because choices/freewill, exists. That we have genuine choices in our mind, every day, which don't involve another entity, is a truism.
Mikey, it was never my intent to prove anything. I am a proponent of free will, myself, and I think you're right. But, being right doesn't make your argument a truism, and it certainly doesn't give you the right to use bad arguments.
You put forth a scenario wherein a choice was tested in the presence of God and in the absence of God. You concluded that God's presence has no impact on your choice.
But, you did not actually do the experiment, so you cannot actually say what the results would be. You simply assumed that the results you expected would happen.
There is no reason to believe that your argument is valid, because either God exists or He doesn't: there is no opportunity to compare the two options, so you cannot say that you know what would happen when the two are juxtaposed.
The plight of free will is not so desperate that we have to resort to bad arguments in order to support it. If free will really exists, the concept will eventually be upheld by logic and scientific inquiry. In the meantime, be patient and remain neutral.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by mike the wiz, posted 06-17-2009 6:34 AM mike the wiz 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