Proof of God

Post Reply New Topic

Mathematics is a formal system based on the principles of first-order logic. Now Orwell, I suppose I did get a little carried away with the name calling but I am VERY adamant and passionate about this subject. You made a claim that implied mathematics is invented rather than discovered and if thats the case than surely we can find something in physical reality which is impossible in mathematics. "Numbers" are just elements of sets satisfying certain algebraic properties.

To reduce it to a simpler problem, if logic is something which is real rather than a human construct, we ought to be able to prove it wrong. Because we *can't*, a priori, it would seem to follow that logic is simply a construct of the human mind. A similar argument holds for mathematics.

And yet there INCREASING numbers of mathematicians who are casting doubt into this orthodox philisophical view.
Suppose it can be demonstrated that our brains are wired for logic. And that such circuitry even exists in non-human animals.
Then can the claim STILL be made that logic is purely an invention of the human mind? For example there are 16 boolean (binary)functions with 2 Boolean variables and 5 of these are used in 1st order logic( AND, OR, NOT, COND, EQVL).
And BTW, you cannot reduce mathematics to logic, even though the 2 are inimately related.

I don't know whether there is absolute truth... answer absolutely true, or false... and if I pick absolutely true, you could try to argue that logically I can't be absolutely sure of that, but that doesn't quite follow. I can think that it's absolutely true that I don't know whether there's an absolute truth on some other topic. And anyway, where was the option "not absolutely true but pretty damn true" that I don't know whether there is absolute truth.

The author of that website is confusing the meaning of "law" when he puts moral laws in the same standing with natural laws. Moral laws are social fabrications intended to prescribe what should be; natural laws are formal statements intended to describe what in fact is.

I've never heard of someone so passionate about the sanctity of logic.

Maybe because they are just passionate? It wouldn't be surprising though. What are the arguments they use to support that view?

I don't know, but there are some things that can indicate that to be the case, for instance, humans are the only species who can apply and understand math, and if someone says that animals can, they would have to show evidence for it, and not the evidence of trained animals, that would be very questionable, which is unlikely.

It appears that, if humans didn't exist, mathematics wouldn't exist, math is somehow of a language or considered as such, humans speak several languages, languages are something that weren't discovered, they were developed and evolved with time, same can be said about math, it wasn't discovered, it was developed and evolved, that seems to indicate of math being related and dependant to the human mind and how it helps humans to understand and interpret what they are able to perceive.


I don't know who Jeebus is, about Christians, I don't think they believe that, or else they would be denying the existence of God or of the spiritual, but I ask, if immaterial things are well, immaterial, where they come from? if they don't directly belong to the physical universe for being immaterial, then where they come from or what are their origin?

Last edited by greenblue on 13 Feb 2009, 9:21 am, edited 2 times in total.

Insofar as I can see it the essential question is not so much whether God is possible but whether it is necessary. Science has gone a good deal of the way to indicate it is not.

The Kingdom of God is within. Looking outside for what is inside, you'll never find anything. This proofofgod website is just so much foolishness.

If God created mankind and science is man's creation, how can science and God be in conflict?

It merely indicates that you can fabricate a superbeing so powerful that there is no way to disprove it.

Last edited by Sand on 13 Feb 2009, 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

That's one way of interpreting what I said.

I'm really not so sure about that particular claim. Many animals including humans do subconscious calculations tantamount to very complicated math, and I've heard more than a few authors argue that in fact all animals utilize some form of built in arithmetic. I simply don't think that this actually make math a "thing".

well, animals and simple arithmetic sounds reasonable and very possible, I'm not sure about complicated math though, but would be interesting to read an author defending that position, my argument was more aimed to the concept, the complexity and the written language of math, as well as the position to believe the existence of math to be taken as something objective as the physical reality.

Not sure if this is a good analogy though but I kinda think of human languages as a way of communication versus animal communication in this case. Words and symbols would become absolutely meaningless on this planet if humans cease to exist.

The human (and other) mind gathers sense input as abstracts of what is going on around it. Each of these inputs become changes in its cellular patterns which are what we designate as memories. The system of integrating these patterns givse the mind a model with which to predict and understand further inputs. Language is a method of transmitting and recording these patterns and mathematics is a way of building complex models from these abstracts that are tightly coherent. These patterns are necessary for all animals to successfully exist but humans are better than most animals in this process.

Good one.

Cannot stop laughing.

All these discussions on abstract concepts, proper definitions of evidence, and pointless debates that essentially come down to determining the meaning of meaning have failed in the same way. None of the forgoing has proven the existance of God; not even remotely.

God, if You are real, then please show Yourself to us all in an undeniable way and without any middlemen to muck it all up again with their subjective religious interpretations; but if You don't exist, then please don't bother.