Page 2 of 3 [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

31 Jan 2009, 8:38 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Anselm's so-called proof is bogus from A to Z, from alpha to omega.

ruveyn

This is actually Plantinga's ontological argument, which is different than Anselm's. For instance, Plantinga's argument uses modal logic, which didn't exist in Anselm's time.



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

01 Feb 2009, 4:53 am

Quote:
Anselm's so-called proof is bogus from A to Z, from alpha to omega.


Why?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Feb 2009, 9:39 am

slowmutant wrote:
Quote:
Anselm's so-called proof is bogus from A to Z, from alpha to omega.


Why?


Because existence is not a predicate. It not specific property of any object. Consider this: suppose existence were a predicate, say e, so e(x) means x exists. Now it is only reasonable to assume -Ex[-e(x )] where E is the existential quantifier (not a predicate). Apply the De Morgan law to get (x)e(x) which is to say everything exists. That simply won't do.

ruveyn



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

01 Feb 2009, 10:21 am

Could you repeat that in English?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Feb 2009, 10:26 am

slowmutant wrote:
Could you repeat that in English?


It is a technical exercise in first order logic. Purchase a book on first order logic and learn something.

ruveyn



bheid
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 437

01 Feb 2009, 10:27 am

ruveyn wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
Quote:
Anselm's so-called proof is bogus from A to Z, from alpha to omega.


Why?


Because existence is not a predicate. It not specific property of any object. Consider this: suppose existence were a predicate, say e, so e(x) means x exists. Now it is only reasonable to assume -Ex[-e(x )] where E is the existential quantifier (not a predicate). Apply the De Morgan law to get (x)e(x) which is to say everything exists. That simply won't do.

ruveyn


didn't spinoza say that everything did exist, and it was all god?



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

01 Feb 2009, 10:29 am

ruveyn wrote:
slowmutant wrote:
Could you repeat that in English?


It is a technical exercise in first order logic. Purchase a book on first order logic and learn something.

ruveyn


D'oh!



Postperson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2004
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,023
Location: Uz

01 Feb 2009, 1:56 pm

in terms of spiritual matters, the only thing that is real is your faith. anything else can be an illusion.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

01 Feb 2009, 2:12 pm

Postperson wrote:
in terms of spiritual matters, the only thing that is real is your faith. anything else can be an illusion.


Is that a variation of Descartes :I am faithful therefore I exist and there are no such things as atheists?



Postperson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2004
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,023
Location: Uz

01 Feb 2009, 2:14 pm

no.



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

01 Feb 2009, 4:15 pm

Sand wrote:
....and there are no such things as atheists?

There are no atheists in foxholes.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Feb 2009, 5:22 pm

Postperson wrote:
in terms of spiritual matters, the only thing that is real is your faith. anything else can be an illusion.


Is pain an illusion?

ruveyn



Postperson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2004
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,023
Location: Uz

01 Feb 2009, 5:55 pm

sometimes, yeah. spiritual or physical?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Feb 2009, 6:33 pm

Postperson wrote:
sometimes, yeah. spiritual or physical?


Physical as in I poured boiling water on my flesh.

ruveyn



Postperson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2004
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,023
Location: Uz

01 Feb 2009, 6:50 pm

yeah, that'd be 'real'. if it's recent, cold water applied immediately reduces the degree of burn.

i scalded myself a few months ago (mishandled the jug), it peeled like a sunburn and stayed dark pink for a couple of months, i think it's gone back to normal now, it's on my chest so i don't look there much. some people use aloe lotions or any kind of sunburn lotion might help.



Confused-Fish
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 946
Location: trapped in a jar

02 Feb 2009, 10:03 am

slowmutant wrote:
What is the relationship between reality and perception? Do I perceive a thing because it is real, or is a thing real because I have perceived it? :chin:

Specifically in relation to supernatural beliefs and spiritual realms.


as far as we know perception is not reality. perception is merely your interpretation, for example a solid brick wall isn't actually solid, its mostly empty space and electrons. the energy fields in our physical bodies cannot pass through the energy fields in the wall and light can not pass through it either which causes us to perceive the wall as a solid object.

On the other hand there is no physical evidence for the existence of our Consciousness which imo points to a strong possibility that our minds are a purely electromagnetic construct anchored to our physical bodies via the energy in our brains (sorta like a 2 way cable id imagine). I suppose that this possibility could potentially lead to a number of strange possibilities concerning reality and perception but who knows? *shrugs*