Atheist Censorship

Previous page 1 ... 11 12 1314 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
- Grouchy
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #360 - April 30, 2011, 09:28 PM

Quote
That's like, the complete opposite to what he did.

No. I explained it quite clearly above how that was not the case.

He did type out the premises in his post, sure. So what did I do? I called him out on them. He then responded by saying that he in no way supports the premises(and therefore the conclusion), he said he was only validating the logical structure of the argument(I do not know really why, nobody objected against the structure).

Fine.

Then you have nothing but the logical structure, as I showed in the post you quoted. You can not have the cake and eat it too. The logical structure however was not even the issue here, as I have shown time after time.

Is there anything that is unclear here? Please tell me.

Quote from: yeezevee on May 03, 2011, 05:40 AM
Grouchy what is the good reason for picking up an innocent girl as Osama bin Laden?
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #361 - May 01, 2011, 12:51 AM

Quote from: Grouchy on April 30, 2011, 09:25 PM
Okay. So you added nothing to the discussion then.

It is equivalent to my friend saying:

This car goes 300 km/h, because I got it from my grandpa.

Then I will tell him that “does not follow”. Now the premises are true. The logical structure is valid. However, the conclusion his is wrong, ergo it does not follow. Stefan made exactly that point by stating the incomprehensibility of quantum mechanics for the basic human senses and how oblivious we are to it, in the same way we would be to the divine had it been among us(I feel like I have said that three times now). Nobody objected the validity of the logical structure. You made that up.

I do not know if I can explain it any clearer than this.

as s_c said above, a valid argument is one in which if the premises are true, then the conclusion is necessarily true.

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- Grouchy
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #362 - May 01, 2011, 01:44 AM

Quote
as s_c said above, a valid argument is one in which if the premises are true, then the conclusion is necessarily true.

This is getting nonsensical. I do not need to point out the fallacy in your above statement. Please reread what you wrote.

A valid argument must by nature have a true conclusion. That is absolutely correct. However, it is after you derive the true conclusion that you can label an argument valid. Not the other way around.

That is the issue here. The conclusion is being disputed. Two correct premises do NOT automatically derive a conclusion. That is absurd. The act of deriving a conclusion is made by a conscious agent. That conscious agent's conclusion could be valid or invalid regardless.

The moon is orbiting around the earth
The earth is orbiting around the sun
(Perfectly true premises)
Therefore, Adolf Hitler is the head of the C.I.A
(A very false conclusion!)

Quote from: yeezevee on May 03, 2011, 05:40 AM
Grouchy what is the good reason for picking up an innocent girl as Osama bin Laden?
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #363 - May 01, 2011, 02:10 AM

You are right, it seems we are going in circles. I believe I've said above all I really wanted to say and won't repeat myself.
You are welcome to have the last word.

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- Grouchy
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #364 - May 01, 2011, 02:17 AM

Haha. So true. I do not even know what prompted such a lengthy discussion. It just got out of hand.

What is this thread about again? Ah, atheist censorship.

Ah well, we agree to disagree at least.

(And you better reply to this mister! I do not like having the last word )

Quote from: yeezevee on May 03, 2011, 05:40 AM
Grouchy what is the good reason for picking up an innocent girl as Osama bin Laden?
- arX
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #365 - May 01, 2011, 02:19 AM

Quote from: Grouchy on May 01, 2011, 01:44 AM
Hitler

I CALL GODWIN'S.

Quote
Two correct premises do NOT automatically derive a conclusion. That is absurd. The act of deriving a conclusion is made by a conscious agent. That conscious agent's conclusion could be valid or invalid regardless.

That sounds valid.

Against the ruin of the world, there
is only one defense: the creative act.

-- Kenneth Rexroth
- Grouchy
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #366 - May 01, 2011, 02:26 AM

Quote
I CALL GODWIN'S.

FUUUUUUUUU-

Quote from: yeezevee on May 03, 2011, 05:40 AM
Grouchy what is the good reason for picking up an innocent girl as Osama bin Laden?
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #367 - May 01, 2011, 03:00 AM

Quote from: arX on May 01, 2011, 02:19 AM

That sounds valid.

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #368 - May 01, 2011, 03:03 AM

Quote from: Grouchy on May 01, 2011, 02:17 AM

(And you better reply to this mister! I do not like having the last word )

No problem.

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- Grouchy
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #369 - May 01, 2011, 03:53 AM

Quote from: z10 on May 01, 2011, 03:00 AM

Hmmm...

Quote from: yeezevee on May 03, 2011, 05:40 AM
Grouchy what is the good reason for picking up an innocent girl as Osama bin Laden?
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #370 - May 01, 2011, 01:24 PM

Grouchy: I don't mean to be rude but... you might want to get a basic grip of logic first. Start here:

Validity

Soundness
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #371 - May 01, 2011, 01:27 PM

You're like a grammar Nazi, except with logic instead.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #372 - May 01, 2011, 01:33 PM

You're like a writer complaining that her editor is insisting on proper grammar.
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #373 - May 01, 2011, 01:37 PM

I'm like a writer on their day off complaining that her editor is phoning her up every five minutes insisting on proper grammar for things like shopping lists and post-it notes, wondering why she has not fired him yet because he sucks at his job anyway.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #374 - May 01, 2011, 01:56 PM

Yes next time someone highlights the words 'as a result', insists that it 'does not follow' and proceeds to explain why that particular proposition doesn't follow from the previous one I will assume that they mean something completely different.
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #375 - May 01, 2011, 02:00 PM

.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- arX
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #376 - May 01, 2011, 02:05 PM

Quote from: Prince Spinoza on May 01, 2011, 01:24 PM
Grouchy: I don't mean to be rude but... blablabla

Would you care to respond to at least one of Grouchy's points? His last post seems to be in need of a retort that's a bit more constructive than posting definitions.

Against the ruin of the world, there
is only one defense: the creative act.

-- Kenneth Rexroth
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #377 - May 01, 2011, 02:06 PM

Quote from: arX on May 01, 2011, 02:05 PM
Would you care to respond to at least one of Grouchy's points? His last post seems to be in need of a retort that's a bit more constructive than posting definitions.

His last post was 'hmmm'

Admittedly I have no response.
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #378 - May 01, 2011, 02:08 PM

Quote from: Prince Spinoza on May 01, 2011, 01:56 PM
Yes next time someone highlights the words 'as a result', insists that it 'does not follow' and proceeds to explain why that particular proposition doesn't follow from the previous one I will assume that they mean something completely different.

But it doesn't follow.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #379 - May 01, 2011, 02:16 PM

Quite possibly. I'm not yet bored enough to look too deeply into epistemology.
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #380 - May 01, 2011, 02:22 PM

Even if we are a manifestation of the divine, we are a limited and particular one, and so, even to understand ourselves as the particularity we are, does not mean we know the broader divine of which we are only a limited and particular manifestation.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #381 - May 01, 2011, 02:28 PM

Quote from: Ishina on May 01, 2011, 02:22 PM
Even if we are a manifestation of the divine, we are a limited and particular one, and so, even to understand ourselves as the particularity we are, does not mean we know the broader divine of which we are only a limited and particular manifestation.

This is an interesting point. One could question whether it is necessary to know the 'whole' divine, to know the divine as such or even whether or not the whole divine can be known.
Alternatively, one can establish an elaborate metaphysics like the Monadology of Leibniz where every single part of the cosmos reflects every other part and therefore, the whole is contained within the parts.

There is certainly room for adjustment here and depends really on how tightly zbd's wants to draw his definition of the divine.

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #382 - May 01, 2011, 02:39 PM

Well, to say everything is a manifestation of the divine is to say we automatically know the divine somewhat as soon as we know anything about anything. But that’s us, from the outside looking in at those in the dilemma, those who might not necessarily be realising the divine unless the divine is shown or illustrated to them.

The colour red might fully realise it is red and all that being so entails, but might not know it is actually a part of a whole spectrum of different colours, and that those colours go towards making a beam of pure white light. It might never know anything of these things beyond knowing itself and yet function without concern or pain, being as it is, blissfully unaware that it knows part of the greater whole by knowing itself, and assuming it only knows itself.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #383 - May 01, 2011, 02:42 PM

Quote from: Grouchy on May 01, 2011, 01:44 AM
This is getting nonsensical. I do not need to point out the fallacy in your above statement. Please reread what you wrote.

A valid argument must by nature have a true conclusion. That is absolutely correct. However, it is after you derive the true conclusion that you can label an argument valid. Not the other way around.

A valid argument need not have a true conclusion. The conclusion of a valid argument would be true if the premises are true. The premises could be false and the argument would still be valid and the conclusion would still be a fiction. A sound argument is valid and has true premises. (I believe z10 sufficiently explained the terms he was using when he responded to you.)

Quote
That is the issue here. The conclusion is being disputed. Two correct premises do NOT automatically derive a conclusion. That is absurd. The act of deriving a conclusion is made by a conscious agent. That conscious agent's conclusion could be valid or invalid regardless.

That has nothing to do with anything.

Quote
The moon is orbiting around the earth
The earth is orbiting around the sun
(Perfectly true premises)
Therefore, Adolf Hitler is the head of the C.I.A
(A very false conclusion!)

Neither does that.
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #384 - May 01, 2011, 02:49 PM

Quote from: Ishina on May 01, 2011, 02:39 PM
Well, to say everything is a manifestation of the divine is to say we automatically know the divine somewhat as soon as we know anything about anything. But that’s us, from the outside looking in at those in the dilemma, those who might not necessarily be realising the divine unless the divine is shown or illustrated to them.

The colour red might fully realise it is red and all that being so entails, but might not know it is actually a part of a whole spectrum of different colours, and that those colours go towards making a beam of pure white light. It might never know anything of these things beyond knowing itself and yet function without concern or pain, being as it is, blissfully unaware that it knows part of the greater whole by knowing itself, and assuming it only knows itself.

This is all true, possibilities abound. Knowing the divine is one of those possibilities and I think, while you may find it extremely unlikely, you will admit it is a possibility nonetheless.

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #385 - May 01, 2011, 02:52 PM

I think I can know what I can know. If I can know myself then I can know myself. It might well be the case that, in knowing myself, I also happen to know the divine somewhat. But until I know what the divine is, what do I actually know beyond myself?

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #386 - May 01, 2011, 02:53 PM

I think it's hard to have a meaningful discussion on this until zeb elaborates on what he meant by divine.
- Prince Spinoza
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #387 - May 01, 2011, 03:10 PM

Quote from: Grouchy on April 30, 2011, 09:28 PM
No. I explained it quite clearly above how that was not the case.

He did type out the premises in his post, sure. So what did I do? I called him out on them. He then responded by saying that he in no way supports the premises(and therefore the conclusion), he said he was only validating the logical structure of the argument(I do not know really why, nobody objected against the structure).

Fine.

Then you have nothing but the logical structure, as I showed in the post you quoted. You can not have the cake and eat it too. The logical structure however was not even the issue here, as I have shown time after time.

Is there anything that is unclear here? Please tell me.

Logical structure is more than simply writing sentences... your example wasn't valid.
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #388 - May 01, 2011, 03:12 PM

Quote from: Ishina on May 01, 2011, 02:52 PM
I think I can know what I can know. If I can know myself then I can know myself. It might well be the case that, in knowing myself, I also happen to know the divine somewhat. But until I know what the divine is, what do I actually know beyond myself?

You trust your faculty of sight, your faculty of reasoning and your faculty of time-perception (all inherent in your nature) to state that the sun will rise tomorrow. Is this something beyond yourself?

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- Ishina
- Militant Atheist
- Ex-Muslim
- No Fate But What We Make
- offline
Re: Atheist Censorship
Reply #389 - May 01, 2011, 03:27 PM

Yes.

Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
Previous page 1 ... 11 12 1314 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »