Page 24 of 24 FirstFirst ... 14222324
Results 231 to 233 of 233

Thread: Same Sex Marriages, Florists, and Bakers

  1. #231
    tWebber carpedm9587's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,623
    Amen (Given)
    24
    Amen (Received)
    1040
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    So you you can not demonstrate on any level that the laws of logic are universal and absolute.
    If course I can't. No one can. If you think you can, you are welcome to try. I would truly like to see it. I do not see how you can avoid circularity. Remember, you cannot USE the principles of logic if you are trying to prove they exist and are universal/absolute or you will be trapped in circularity. SO how do you "prove" something without those principles?

    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    That all human rationality is suspect.
    Now that's an interesting observation. As you note, we are finite beings with no claim to perfection. Of course all human rationality is "suspect," if by that you mean we can never have absolute, inerrant knowledge. How can a finite being ever claim such a thing? Even if the fundamental principles of reason could be proven to be universal and absolute, we have no means of knowing that we are applying them inerrantly.

    Knowledge only takes us so far. The rest is a leap of faith. You place your faith (I think?) in this god you worship. I place my faith in the principles I observe operating all around me every day. I accept the fundamental principles of reason on the basis of an informed faith rooted in a) they work, b) they can be successfully used to predict outcomes, and c) my brain cannot conceive otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    But you just said that these concepts can not be demonstrated to be universal or absolute.
    AFAIK, these principles cannot be proven without circularity.

    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    So what exactly are you grasping?
    The fundamental concepts of logic (as well as mathematics)

    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    The subjective?
    I have no idea what this means.
    Last edited by carpedm9587; Today at 05:23 AM.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  2. #232
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    23,436
    Amen (Given)
    1523
    Amen (Received)
    4675
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    If course I can't. No one can. If you think you can, you are welcome to try. I would truly like to see it. I do not see how you can avoid circularity. Remember, you cannot USE the principles of logic if you are trying to prove they exist and are universal/absolute or you will be trapped in circularity. SO how do you "prove" something without those principles?
    Again, my argument was not circular - I was not using logic to demonstrate logic, I was using logic to argue for the universality of logical laws. It is a subtle difference, but a real one.


    Knowledge only takes us so far. The rest is a leap of faith. You place your faith (I think?) in this god you worship. I place my faith in the principles I observe operating all around me every day. I accept the fundamental principles of reason on the basis of an informed faith rooted in a) they work, b) they can be successfully used to predict outcomes, and c) my brain cannot conceive otherwise.
    Yes they work, to the limited degree that we understand. As far as the mind not being able to conceive otherwise, many of us can not conceive that the gassing of Jewish children is a moral good in a particular culture.


    AFAIK, these principles cannot be proven without circularity.
    But your acceptance of logical concepts is a leap of faith and circular. So why the problem with circularity?
    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...

  3. #233
    tWebber carpedm9587's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,623
    Amen (Given)
    24
    Amen (Received)
    1040
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Again, my argument was not circular - I was not using logic to demonstrate logic, I was using logic to argue for the universality of logical laws. It is a subtle difference, but a real one.
    Again, in the hopes you will finally see it:

    You were using logic to argue for the universality of logical laws. You have to assume logical laws are universal to make that argument. If you do not make that assumption, then you cannot show that there is not a place in the universe where they are not operational, which would destroy your "universal" claim. It's circular, Seer. Why it is you do not see it I cannot explain.

    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Yes they work, to the limited degree that we understand. As far as the mind not being able to conceive otherwise, many of us can not conceive that the gassing of Jewish children is a moral good in a particular culture.
    You are trying to equate two things that are simply not at par. The human brain can certainly entertain the concept "gassing children (I don't know why you need to single out Jewish ones) is moral." Indeed, I can even conceive of circumstances in which that act might BE the moral choice, if it is the path of least harm. But the human brain simply cannot be forced to accept "a claim can be true and false at the same time/space and in the same way" or "A is not equal to A" as true statements.

    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    But your acceptance of logical concepts is a leap of faith and circular. So why the problem with circularity?
    A "leap of faith" is not "circular." It is simply a leap of faith. It is an assumption that a statement is true, without a logical argument supporting it. A circular argument is one that uses the conclusion in a logical argument to arrive at the conclusion. Usually, it happens when the conclusion appears as one of the premises somewhere in the chain of logic. When the conclusion is about the laws of logic, the argument is circular because the argument requires the laws to be true in order to frame the argument about the laws.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •