A penitent troll apologises for mocking atheism. On show here!

@fresco,

The post was to Fil. I am merely reminding him of previous conversations about the inadequacy of logic. (Ref: Niels Bohr... And Wittgenstein also deflated Russell's Paradox type arguments as a semantic aberration). But then that stuff does not take kindly to pot-holing !

1 Reply

@igm,

Quote:

atheists don't care whether there is a god..

Would it be fair to say theists don't care whether there is no god?

I am an atheists and I find the truth to be important and if the truth was to be there is a god I would like to know that truth rather than believe it

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

I think you need to investigate different takes on "truth". The same "absolutism" which underpins the concept of"God" can underpin that of "truth" My position is to reject absolutism per se. . I see "truth" as "what works" and for believers "God is what works".

2 Replies

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

The post was to Fil. I am merely reminding him of previous conversations about the inadequacy of logic. (Ref: Niels Bohr... And Wittgenstein also deflated Russell's Paradox type arguments as a semantic aberration). But then that stuff does not take kindly to pot-holing !

Right! Now you are doing away with logic if it gets in the way of a BELIEF you are attempting to treat as a TRUTH.

C'mon, Fresco. If you hear any digging being done...it is because you are the guy using the shovel.

0 Replies

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

I think you need to investigate different takes on "truth". The same "absolutism" which underpins the concept of"God" can underpin that of "truth" My position is to reject absolutism per se. . I see "truth" as "what works" and for believers "God is what works".

And of course...if you "see" it that way...that has to be the case!

How in the world did we ever get to this?

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

Quote:
atheists don't care whether there is a god..

Would it be fair to say theists don't care whether there is no god?

I am an atheists and I find the truth to be important and if the truth was to be there is a god I would like to know that truth rather than believe it

RL...I think many atheists (and theists, for that matter) do not find the question to be uninteresting...nor do they take the position that "they do not care."

Some do...and apparently igm does. But to make it a universal seems a far stretch.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

How in the world did we ever get to this?

Which "we" is that Frank ? You mean you have never heard of the pragmaticists or the neo-pragmaticists ? Surprise! surprise !

1 Reply

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

Quote:
How in the world did we ever get to this?

Which "we" is that Frank ? You mean you have never heard of the pragmaticists or the neo-pragmaticists ? Surprise! surprise !

Fresco...what I see happening here is what I often refer to as the Ptolomy effect.

Ptolemy was convinced that the Earth was the center of the universe...so he invented a form of celestial mechanics that verified his conviction. There was no need for the celestial mechanics that he positied...except to reinforce the notion that he began with.

You...and some of the people you cite...apparently decided that there is no absolute REALITY...and now you are offering "language deficiency" and inefficiency of logic (at times) as explanations for the self-contradictions inherent in that.

There is no way you arrived at that "language deficiency" or "inadequacy of logic" reasonably. You use it simply because it is necessary to maintain the integrity about your absurd guesses about REALITY.

What actually IS, Fresco, IS what IS.

The absolute REALITY is whatever actually IS...no matter deficiencies of language or limitations of logic.

Until you find one a philosopher who points you in that direction...and upon whom you can call in your endless appeals to authority...you will never acknowledge that.

Fine...I wish you peace anyway.

I suspect, however, that you are not as comfortable with your position as you would have us accept.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Again, why should "truth" have different takes, Fresco? Unlike the concept of "God", truth is NOT a man made concept. People do not question each other about what a rock is like how people question what God is. A rock ( something man didn't create) has one truth/meaning. God/religion (something man did create) has many truths/meanings. We didn't create reality, so why should truth have more than one meaning when it comes to reality?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Right on Frank.

1 Reply

@mikeymojo,

mikeymojo wrote:

Right on Frank.

Thank you, Mikey.

0 Replies

@mikeymojo,

I really don't have time to go into the various philosophical theories of "truth" which you can google for yourself. But if you are happy to continue with an ill informed high school debate, you don't need any well established philosophical input.

1 Reply

@mikeymojo,

Quote:

truth is NOT a man made concept

Are you certain? Where did it come from?

1 Reply

@fresco,

Well established by who? A bunch of "thinkers" who got caught up in their own concepts, who then killed philosophy by creating "language problems" for words like truth and reality? Give me a break. Man discovers real truths and creates false truths. Frank's Ptolemy argument proves that.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

Quote:
truth is NOT a man made concept

Are you certain? Where did it come from?

The existence of the universe and the laws of physics. Two things Man didn't create.

1 Reply

@mikeymojo,

Quote:

Man discovers real truths and creates false truths. Frank's Ptolemy argument proves that.

It seems that Frank's argument illustrated Ptolemy's problem with confirmation biases. Don't we too have the same problem?

0 Replies

@mikeymojo,

Quote:

The existence of the universe and the laws of physics. Two things Man didn't create.

I heard somewhere before. "that in the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was god
It does seem to me that when words are logically strung together concepts are born.

Do you think that plants and animals have an idea of universe or laws of physics?

1 Reply

I heard this interesting quote or snatch of poetry somewhere once, it's not in the bible-
"Of all God's creatures, only man prays, or has need to"

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Quote:

"Of all (God's) creatures, only man prays, or has need to"

Romeo, I congratulate you on selecting a potential chunk of genuine insight !
All that needs to be done in tidying it up is to remove the superfluous adjective "God's" from the statement. The specifically human "need for prayer" is part of the price some humans elect to pay for their unique cognitive and language abilities which allow them to partially predict and control their lives. The omniscient anthropomorphic deity they evoke serves to shore up those limitations and its associated insecurities.

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

Quote:
The existence of the universe and the laws of physics. Two things Man didn't create.

I heard somewhere before. "that in the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was god
It does seem to me that when words are logically strung together concepts are born.

Do you think that plants and animals have an idea of universe or laws of physics?

Sorry got called into work. To answer your question, I don't know if they do or not..and neither do you. It's a question that can't be answered at this time, no matter how much one tries to conceptualize the answer. Maybe we aren't advanced enough right now to discover if plants and animals have ideas about the universe nature, but will be in the future. That's where Ptolemy messed up. He created the concept of earth being the center of the universe before the proper technology was around to confirm his claim. And it was deemed truth for most of civilized history. His concept turned something that really is (earth is not the center of the universe) into something it's really not (earth is the center of the universe). And people believed it without any evidence but Ptolemy's, which obviously wasn't correct, as technology has proven.

But I wont answer the question with some guess that I have no evidence for. Wait heres a good one. I guess I could bring my dog to the roof of my house and see if he walks off the edge. If he doesn't then he must have some inclination of reality and physics. If he walks off, I guess not. But it would prove nothing because I still wouldn't know.

1 Reply

A penitent troll apologises for mocking atheism. On show here!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know