Announcement

Collapse

Philosophy 201 Guidelines

Cogito ergo sum

Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Arguments you should not use

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arguments you should not use

    Hi, and welcome to thread of Demi on arguments not to use

    Please only discuss/comment argument listed by Demi here, not other arguments. If you think other arguments belong here on 'arguments not to use' pm Demi and maybe he post it.

    Number 1)

    If our brain cause our thoughts, and our brains are material, our brains follow the laws of physics and there is no way for our mind to effect that since our mind would have to produce a force that overcomes the natural forces in nature, and that would violate the laws of physics, ie. a miracle.

    Please don't say this (or stuff like this), cos

    A) Laws of physics is description, not prescription (very very very basic point)
    B) Current standard theories of physics has contradiction when put together (basic). So please don't go 'X can't happen, cos self-contradictory physics says so!!!', is big failure as philosophical argument.
    Last edited by demi-conservative; 10-04-2016, 01:00 PM.
    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

  • #2
    Interesting!
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #3
      Number 1) (continued)

      It explains all the particles and forces that govern our lives, and it leaves no room for the soul, which is why we know substance dualism is false.
      To build upon earlier post, what we call laws of physics are like maps. Maps of reality. But map is not reality.

      So yes, physics now may have no room for soul. But that means only that (self-contradictory!) map no has room, not reality.

      Justemember laws are maps, and no careless mixup of map and reality should happen
      Last edited by demi-conservative; 10-04-2016, 02:19 PM.
      Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

      Comment


      • #4
        My argument is that Shuny is a poop head therefore it follows that Christianity is true! Works for me.
        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
          Hi, and welcome to thread of Demi on arguments not to use

          Please only discuss/comment argument listed by Demi here, not other arguments. If you think other arguments belong here on 'arguments not to use' pm Demi and maybe he post it.

          Number 1)




          Please don't say this (or stuff like this), cos

          A) Laws of physics is description, not prescription (very very very basic point)
          B) Current standard theories of physics has contradiction when put together (basic). So please don't go 'X can't happen, cos self-contradictory physics says so!!!', is big failure as philosophical argument.
          Not to mention the fact the argument excludes any sort of feedback loop.
          I'm not here anymore.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
            Number 1) (continued)



            To build upon earlier post, what we call laws of physics are like maps. Maps of reality. But map is not reality.

            So yes, physics now may have no room for soul. But that means only that (self-contradictory!) map no has room, not reality.

            Justemember laws are maps, and no careless mixup of map and reality should happen
            And, since this is philosophy, one can only point to more maps.
            I'm not here anymore.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
              Hi, and welcome to thread of Demi on arguments not to use

              Please only discuss/comment argument listed by Demi here, not other arguments. If you think other arguments belong here on 'arguments not to use' pm Demi and maybe he post it.

              Number 1)




              Please don't say this (or stuff like this), cos

              A) Laws of physics is description, not prescription (very very very basic point)
              B) Current standard theories of physics has contradiction when put together (basic). So please don't go 'X can't happen, cos self-contradictory physics says so!!!', is big failure as philosophical argument.
              Wow. This is your 3rd grade logic here in action.

              For A, yes the laws of physics are descriptive - surprised you got that right. But nothing about that negates my quote. The laws of physics say what can happen and cannot happen in their description. Our mind causing physical matter cannot happen.

              For B, this I assume is referring to QM and relativity. That's irrelevant here because both QM and relativity rule out mind causing matter. And because The Laws Underlying The Physics of Everyday Life Are Completely Understood.

              Think about how stupid your argument is. Suppose you were going to jump off a cliff and try flying by flapping your wings and someone says, "it can't happen because of the laws of physics." You would respond "the laws of physics are contradictory!" <jump> ....<splat!>
              Blog: Atheism and the City

              If your whole worldview rests on a particular claim being true, you damn well better have evidence for it. You should have tons of evidence.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                Number 1) (continued)



                To build upon earlier post, what we call laws of physics are like maps. Maps of reality. But map is not reality.

                So yes, physics now may have no room for soul. But that means only that (self-contradictory!) map no has room, not reality.

                Justemember laws are maps, and no careless mixup of map and reality should happen
                And if there is an island that is not on the map, the map is obviously wrong, so once we see it we add it. But we know there is an island there through empirical evidence. Likewise, we understand the laws of physics mostly due to empirical evidence. The evidence determines the laws and we adjust the laws accordingly. That's why they're descriptive. But none of this allows a magical soul. If there was a soul that could cause matter to move, we'd have empirical evidence for it and it would be part of the laws of physics but we don't and we fully understand all the relevant laws of physics.
                Blog: Atheism and the City

                If your whole worldview rests on a particular claim being true, you damn well better have evidence for it. You should have tons of evidence.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                  And, since this is philosophy, one can only point to more maps.
                  I personally believe that's why US Americans can't find South Africa such as the Iraq, everywhere like such as....

                  oh, um...




                  nevermind
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by The Thinker View Post
                    .

                    For A, yes the laws of physics are descriptive - surprised you got that right. But nothing about that negates my quote. The laws of physics say what can happen and cannot happen in their description. Our mind causing physical matter cannot happen.
                    You mean, 'our mind causing physical matter cannot happen in description'. That no imply logically that they no can happen in reality, which what matters. Guess what, big bait-and-switch/equivocation you trying to do fails

                    There is saying, "map is not territory". Not sure how many times I need to repeat, rephrase very very simple point.

                    For B, this I assume is referring to QM and relativity.
                    DING DING DING!!! You get a prize!

                    That's irrelevant here because both QM and relativity rule out mind causing matter.
                    About "ruling out", see above. And also, philosophically you relying on contradicting theories together. Ever heard of principle of explosion?

                    This is just sweeping statement assuming philosophical/logical truth of induction.
                    Last edited by demi-conservative; 10-04-2016, 11:43 PM.
                    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Part 2:

                      Originally posted by The Thinker View Post

                      Think about how stupid your argument is. Suppose you were going to jump off a cliff and try flying by flapping your wings and someone says, "it can't happen because of the laws of physics." You would respond "the laws of physics are contradictory!" <jump> ....<splat!>


                      If you're going to try to do silly argument to absurdity from consequence, try no so silly ones.

                      Can you here yourself, """"""""""thinker"""""""""? 'Someone might use argument of yours to do stupid stuff'

                      That is not logical disproof and you know it. Buck up man!!!
                      Last edited by demi-conservative; 10-05-2016, 12:05 AM.
                      Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by The Thinker View Post
                        If there was a soul that could cause matter to move, we'd have empirical evidence for it


                        That just assertion!

                        we fully understand all the relevant laws of physics.
                        Again, this just assuming logical truth of (one form of) induction!! So much assertion, so little logical proof from you. Sad!!!
                        Last edited by demi-conservative; 10-04-2016, 11:32 PM.
                        Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Number 1) (continued):

                          Miracles cannot exist in reality, because scientific laws ban it
                          We all know many atheists like to say this. But if we prod atheist of this type, he will admit scientific laws only description, not prescription. So how is no-prescription-only-description map supposed to ban stuff in reality (which is prescription)?

                          *crickets*

                          I should say that seems to me this type of bait-and-switch is not purposely dishonest. Somehow these atheists really sincere, just can't help themselves making basic errors. So be patient
                          Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                            Not to mention the fact the argument excludes any sort of feedback loop.
                            Feedback loop?
                            Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              I personally believe that's why US Americans can't find South Africa such as the Iraq, everywhere like such as....

                              oh, um...




                              nevermind

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
                              161 responses
                              514 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
                              88 responses
                              354 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
                              21 responses
                              133 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Working...
                              X