Home | Community | Message Board


High Mountain Compost
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
"philosophical evidence"
    #2325297 - 02/11/04 07:40 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

since I'm not allowed to discuss it elsewhere, I'll start a new thread.
hopefully there can be a serious, meaningful discussion of the issues.

here is "philosophical evidence" for the existence of God recently "unveiled" (to great fanfare) here in this forum:

1. In order for matter to exist there has to be an apprehending consciousness.

2. The universe existed before man.

3. Therefore, God, the ultimate apprehending consciousness, created matter but was not subject to the rules of nature, i.e. co-existence with matter, because He is supernatural.


this contains a HUGE blind spot in logic.
the more perceptive ones here are already aware of it.

the argument is if both premises are correct, God exists.
but the only way both premises can be correct is if you assume that God exists.
and the existence of God is what you're trying to prove in the first place!

let's assume premise 1 is true,
if the existence of matter requires an apprehending consciousness, then the universe could not have existed before man, so premise 2 can't be true. unless you assume that God exists to apprehend the universe into existence.
(if #1 is true, #2 can't be true, unless God exists)

now let's assume that premise 2 is true,
if the universe existed before man, then an apprehending consciousness is not required for matter to exist, so premise 1 can't be true. unless you assume that God exists to apprehend the universe into existence.
(if #2 is true, #1 can't be true, unless God exists)

the only way the two premises (which are meant to prove God's existence) can both be true is if you assume that God exists.
once again this is completely useless "philosophical evidence"


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,380
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325333 - 02/11/04 07:46 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

since I'm not allowed to discuss it elsewhere

Please don't put words in my mouth. I said nothing about you not being allowed to discuss something you want to discuss, wherever you choose to discuss it.

What you were posting was in no way, shape, or form a discussion. It was baiting and very close to a flame upon another member, which is not allowed.


--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325344 - 02/11/04 07:49 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

I happen to believe that premise 1 is false and premise 2 is true.

or I would re-word premise 1 to say:

"In order for meaning* to exist there has to be an apprehending consciousness."

matter can exist independently of thought, but for matter to have any meaning, it has to be perceived by an apprehending consciousness.
in other words, matter is meaningless without an apprehending consciousness.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,944
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325355 - 02/11/04 07:51 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

My own philisophical evidence for the existance of God, is simple.



Life.

:heart:


--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,380
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325366 - 02/11/04 07:54 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

I agree with your interpretation, that premise 1 is false and premise 2 is true - as I am fairly certain that matter exists independently of concsiousness (thought it may be that matter itself involves some form of consciousness).


--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: trendal]
    #2325402 - 02/11/04 07:59 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

sure thing. my bad.
but just so you know I wasn't baiting or flaming, unless some people choose to take it that way (how could they if they have me on ignore?)
I might have said it harshly but I was merely expressing my skepticism at the IDEA that was under discussion.
I had the distinct impression that such things were allowed in this forum, since so many others get away with it (even in that very thread).
if I'm being held to a higher standard, I'm flattered.

oh and thanks for the official warning.
I'll behave now. this place is SO much more interesting when we're sitting around blowing smoke up each others asses instead of having meaningful debates and discussions. :thumbup:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,380
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325452 - 02/11/04 08:10 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Erm...ok :smirk:

Check your PMs...


--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: trendal]
    #2325529 - 02/11/04 08:32 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

I hear ya. a deal it is.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,380
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325540 - 02/11/04 08:37 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

Awesome :smile:


--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325581 - 02/11/04 08:49 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

some more "philosophical evidence" :rolleyes:
(this time proving that free will doesn't exist, from SpecialEd's free will thread)

1. Either you will eat an apple at lunch tomorrow, or you will not. Excluded middle.

2. If you will eat an apple at lunch tomorrow, then nothing you do between now and then will stop you from having that apple at lunch. Noncontradiction.

3. If you will not eat an apple at lunch tomorrow, then any effort you make between now and then to eat such an apple will be, litterally, fruitless. Noncontradiction.

4. You do not now have two equally available options to eat or not to eat that apple. (By definition of what an option is) Thus,

5. You are not really free concerning whether you will or will not eat an apple at lunch tommorow. (By the definition of freedom as requiring real options)




Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,380
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325598 - 02/11/04 09:03 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

The problem with this argument is it has ignored the natural progression of cause->effect in that order and only in that order.

Premise 1 is straight-forward, and needs no discussion.

Premise 2 fails to mention the initial cause of the effect (eating the apple). If you eat an apple at lunch tomorrow, you have chosen to eat that apple at some point prior to lunch tomorrow. The proper statement would be to say that there is nothing you can do after the fact to change the effect.

The same argument finds premise 3 false, again noting that a choise has been made to not eat the apple at some point prior to tomorrow's lunch.


--------------------
You're here because you know something.
What you know you can't explain,
But you feel it;
You've felt it your entire life.
That there's something wrong with the world.
You don't know what it is, but it's there....
Like a splinter in your mind...
Driving you mad.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: "philosophical evidence" [Re: infidelGOD]
    #2325630 - 02/11/04 09:54 PM (12 years, 9 months ago)

1. Either you will eat an apple at lunch tomorrow, or you will not. Excluded middle.

What if the fruit in question is a hybrid pear-apple?

What if you eat then regurgitate said apple?

What if it is chunks of apple as in apple pie?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* I have philosophical evidence for the existence of God!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
Anonymous 7,606 109 02/14/04 01:28 AM
by SpecialEd
* Philosophical evidence that God Probably does not exist.
( 1 2 3 all )
SpecialEd 8,129 52 02/07/04 08:30 PM
by nubious
* philosophical evidence that philosophical evidence is bullsh infidelGOD 814 10 02/15/04 07:38 AM
by Mal_Fenderson
* Evidence! Anonymous 774 11 02/05/04 01:17 PM
by Sclorch
* Looking for The Philosopher's Stone?
( 1 2 all )
Sclorch 1,989 22 07/14/03 05:40 PM
by trendal
* Philosophical Fallacies spud 1,745 16 05/13/04 04:12 AM
by Jellric
* The Fallacies of Philosophical Debate DiploidM 27,736 1 04/14/07 03:48 PM
by Diploid
* The Difference Between A Wise Man and a Philosopher. AlCapwn 2,407 19 12/30/08 06:43 PM
by Bernackums

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
1,183 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 10 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Shroom Supply
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.036 seconds spending 0.001 seconds on 14 queries.