Searching for GOD...

[Nearly Sane]

Assuming determinism, Alan has arrived at his illogical position due to past events. However, to say that it is "impervious to influence" is incorrect. Part of what will determine his future position will be what is said on this forum. It might not change his mind (probably won't) but it will form an input to his future state.

Determinism is not fatalism.

Mmm determinism is not fatalism because that would be a category mistake. BUT anything that is said to Alan in the position of determinism is already determined so while that will have an influence it is already set in stone so doesn't change anything.

[Gordon]

Nearly Sane.

Gordon has spent the whole afternoon ''just mentioning arguments''.
Where were you then?
Don't be so hypocritical.

He also stated ''arguments for God are fallacious and incoherent'' That carries the burden of proof.

So, since I've made this point in relation of all such arguments, and since they are fallacious in different ways, which one would you prefer to focus on? How about the one you find most convincing.

[wigginhall]

I thought that there has been a lot of criticism  of Gödel's axioms used in his proof.   For example, he cites 'positive property' in one axiom, but doesn't define it.   God obviously would exemplify all positive properties, and one of these is existing necessarily, and then G cites the famous step in modal logic, ,that if something is 'possibly necessary' then it exists.    Well, if that makes you happy, good luck to you, and may all your camels be fertile.   

[ekim]

Assuming determinism, Alan has arrived at his illogical position due to past events. However, to say that it is "impervious to influence" is incorrect. Part of what will determine his future position will be what is said on this forum. It might not change his mind (probably won't) but it will form an input to his future state.

Determinism is not fatalism.

That's a better explanation to what I was getting at.  With the constant drip, drip, drip of argument I expect there will be some erosion to the contents of his mind but perhaps his 'heart' will remain constant.

[Nearly Sane]

I asked the question because you said 'I am also bound to point it out' which to me implied you had no option.  However your current reply clarifies what you meant.  You say 'if determinism is true', do you believe it is?

yes, I said that under the assumption that determinism is true. If it is true, Alan's posts, mine, yours ate all bound to happen. It's neither a point for it, against it, or even very interesting since it's a tautology.

As for do I believe determinism is true, in one sense does it matter? What I believe won't change it. I work on a day to day basis as if it isn't true but as per the quote, I appear to have no choice in that. And yet even that belief isn't consistent because it seems that anything I think appears without any choice in thinking it.

I don't have an obligation to put up a coherent world view just because Alan puts up an incoherent one. His claim, his burden of proof.

[Nearly Sane]

I thought that there has been a lot of criticism  of Gödel's axioms used in his proof.   For example, he cites 'positive property' in one axiom, but doesn't define it.   God obviously would exemplify all positive properties, and one of these is existing necessarily, and then G cites the famous step in modal logic, ,that if something is 'possibly necessary' then it exists.    Well, if that makes you happy, good luck to you, and may all your camels be fertile.   

This, while I agree with much of it, seems to indulge Vlad in his shifting the burden of proof. Make a claim and then ask anyone whom disagrees with the claim to present all the arguments they might ever have heard or Vlad might name in a Gish gallop and say why they are wrong. If Vlad thinks Gödel is valid, up to him to present surely?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

He stated that, to date all the arguments presented have contained a fallacy.

Do you agree that every argument you have ever seen for the existence of god contains a fallacy?

No.......... I have no reason to believe that since no one will cite evidence of it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

This, while I agree with much of it, seems to indulge Vlad in his shifting the burden of proof. Make a claim and then ask anyone whom disagrees with the claim to present all the arguments they might ever have heard or Vlad might name in a Gish gallop and say why they are wrong. If Vlad thinks Gödel is valid, up to him to present surely?

Nearly sane. Please show where I said ''Godel is valid''.

[Nearly Sane]

Nearly sane. Please show where I said ''Godel is valid''.

quote mining again, Vlad? Why did you dishonestly remove the "if'

[Walt Zingmatilder]

quote mining again, Vlad? Why did you dishonestly remove the "if'

Why even bring up the idea that I think Godel is right?

[Stranger]

Do you agree that every argument you have ever seen for the existence of god contains a fallacy?

No.......... I have no reason to believe that since no one will cite evidence of it.

The evidence is your own inability to cite an argument for god that does not contain a fallacy.

[Nearly Sane]

Why even bring up the idea that I think Godel is right?

because you cited the argument.

Any chance of you apologising for your lying quote mining?

[Alan Burns]

So you are closed minded then?

You do not accept the possibility that you are mistaken about finding god, and it could all just be in your mind.

When you next chat to him, ask him to contact me, then I will also believe.

The truth is, that YOU are closed minded not me.

If you ever experience the indescribable joy of knowing God's love I feel sure there would be no turning back for you either.  I am certain God is trying to contact you - perhaps through this forum.  You just need to answer His call.

[Nearly Sane]

If you ever experience the indescribable joy of knowing God's love I feel sure there would be no turning back for you either.  I am certain God is trying to contact you - perhaps through this forum.  You just need to answer His call.

Not by you lying surely?

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

If you ever experience the indescribable joy of knowing God's love I feel sure there would be no turning back for you either.  I am certain God is trying to contact you - perhaps through this forum.  You just need to answer His call.

Well let's put it to the test then. I have just generated a 6 digit random number. Presumably God knows what it is.

Being as you are so close to him why don't you ask him to reveal it to you.

I would take a correct answer as a clear a sign as there can be that there is indeed something to reach out to. Far far more effective then any of the "arguments" you have so far put forwards.

I await the call!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

because you cited the argument.

Any chance of you apologising for your lying quote mining?

So you admit raising that I think Godel is right.... then want me to apologise to you?

[wigginhall]

This, while I agree with much of it, seems to indulge Vlad in his shifting the burden of proof. Make a claim and then ask anyone whom disagrees with the claim to present all the arguments they might ever have heard or Vlad might name in a Gish gallop and say why they are wrong. If Vlad thinks Gödel is valid, up to him to present surely?

Yes, you are right.  I couldn't resist it, partly because I can't believe that anyone finds these arguments at all convincing. 

[Sebastian Toe]

If ....

....you ever experience the indescribable joy of knowing God's love through the one and only true path ie that Muhammad is the last messenger of God, and that submission to God is the means to get eternal salvation.
I feel sure there would be no turning back for you either. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yes, you are right.  I couldn't resist it, partly because I can't believe that anyone finds these arguments at all convincing.

What a great shame we are unlikely to find out what arguments and why.

[wigginhall]

If you ever experience the indescribable joy of knowing God's love I feel sure there would be no turning back for you either.  I am certain God is trying to contact you - perhaps through this forum.  You just need to answer His call.

But I hear Satan in your voice!  Be it known that the great spirit  of Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, now roams through the known universe, and indicates to us when Satan is trying to trap and entice us.   Be on guard, as Satan pours his honeyed words through your brain soul. 

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

#15129

It will be interesting to see what SotS replies.

Haven't read it for a while, but remember it as a very elegant book, and famous as a summary of evolution, and the analogy is between that and a blind watchmaker. Or if you like, natural selection has no purpose and no plan in mind.

yet comes up with DNA as the blueprint for all living organisms, according to some!

Citing design, hence a designer allegedly creates an infinite regression, but design from non-design is ok.

Hence the blind watchmaker is supposed to be better than some entity that knows what they are doing.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What does what Gordon posts gave to do with me? As to where I was, I was taking my mother out for lunch. It's not being a hypocrite if I don't pick up everyone on this board for their wrong arguments - that would just be you indulging in a tu quoque fallacy.

If you want to be ''the police'' you cannot choose who you arrest.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Just a quick tip for anyone interested - I've decided not to reply to Vlad when he's lying.

So far, it's freed up the whole day!

[torridon]

If you ever experience the indescribable joy of knowing God's love I feel sure there would be no turning back for you either.  I am certain God is trying to contact you - perhaps through this forum.  You just need to answer His call.

Well the least he could do is sign up for an account and start posting.  Should be a doddle for someone who can bend the laws of physics on a whim

[Nearly Sane]

So you admit raising that I think Godel is right.... then want me to apologise to you?

No, and this is now another lie. You cited Gödel and I said if you think he's right you should make the case. Now you are lying about lying,