Fed my dog just this morning!
Does that mean it exists?
The dog? I guess so, unless you imagined it... You eatin' brownies, over there Bll?
Brownies from Heaven - mana mana mana!
Telling you to have a good day, would be redundant.
If you are persuaded that an object A does not exist, then it is the proof of the non-existence of A for you.
If you are persuaded that an object A exist, then it is the proof of the existence of A for you.
The essense of proof is "persuasion." This applies even to logic as a system of tautology, where axioms are set to be persuasive for most humans. And if you are convinced of axioms of logic, and logic proved the (non-/)existence of A, then you would be persuaded of it as a theorem. However the system of axioms of logic could have a flaw for the topic.
Godel, in an unpublished article, proved the existence of God. Could you be convinced of the relevancy of logic here?
Perhaps, though I have not confirmed yet as I do not have a copy of the article in his collected works vol.3, his proof is logically correct. The question is the validity of application of logic here.
The problem is whether God that is held as a concept in one's mind or in our existence itself is the model of the "God" in the proof of Godel (or spelled Goedel). For a theory to be meaningful, the theory has a model that you actually mean in experience.
Satt,
...WHEN, you come across that article I would really like to see it.
Booman..
You can order it through Amazon. Search with keywords "Godel; collected works; vol.3."
Well, I will search and post it here.
Booman..
It appears that the volumes I~III are out of stock at Amazon. You can find a copy of the volume III here:
http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-507255-3
Just because scientists who have been exposed to the concept of god believe in such, doesn't make it true. They are, afer all, still 'guessing.' Is 'guessing' by scientists sufficient to prove their is a god? I think not. c.i.
the ontological argument is as follows:It is a conceptual truth (or, so to speak, true by definition) that God is a being than which none greater can be imagined (i.e., the greatest possible being that can be imagined).
God exists as an idea in the mind.
A being that exists as an idea in the mind and in reality is, other things being equal, greater than a being that exists only as an idea in the mind.
Thus, if God exists only as an idea in the mind, then we can imagine something that is greater than God (i.e., a greatest possible being that does exist).
But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God (for it is a contradiction to suppose that we can imagine a being greater than the greatest possible being that can be imagined.)
Therefore, God exists.
logic can be awfully silly sometimes.
dyslexia wrote:logic can be awfully silly sometimes.
Logic is complete with the current system of axioms.
The proble is the validity of the model corresponding to the objects dealt with in the system of logic.
