Page 2 of 30 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 295

Thread: When does proving one's truth claims come to an end?

  1. #11
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,766
    Amen (Given)
    2027
    Amen (Received)
    5568
    Quote Originally Posted by mattbballman31 View Post
    Sure! I was responding to this:



    Maybe it depends on what 'principally feasible' means. I took it to mean 'feasible' based on 'principle'. The only kind of feasible break from searching, based on principle, which would be a random suspension of PSR, would be an irrational or arational suspension, depending on whether the randomness of the suspension violated rational norms or was such that it was without any norms at all.

    Examples of these kinds of violations or these kinds of breaks would be any kind of fallacy or form of unjustified reasoning or any kind of metaphysically incomplete explanation. Fallacies are obvious enough: they violate rational norms. But perhaps you might flout epistemic norms in toto: perhaps you're a postmodernist. Norms are phallic hangovers of a bygone logocentrism, an idiotic sublimation bubbling up into a European, colonial mindset that invented truth as a power-structure to subjugate other ideologies, etc., etc., and on and on. In this case, you have an instance of flouting epistemic norms, of it being such that you don't have any norms at all. IF the norms were real, this definitely would be an example of a random suspension of PSR.

    Okay, when I refered to a break that would be non-arbitrary or non-question-begging, what I was trying to say was that you could have a feasible break, based on principle, that would NOT be a random suspension of PSR in the ways I just specified. That is, it wouldn't involve fallacies, instances of unjustified reasoning, being such as to flout all epistemic norms, or being such that it is a metaphysically incomplete explanation (or being such as to include commitments with incompatible entailments). If it isn't any of these things, there doesn't seem to me to be any possibility of randomly suspensing PSR, even if you "break searching at a certain point".
    OK Matt I get this, so can you give me an actual example of such a feasible break? I could imagine many non-arbitrary or non-question-begging breaks that have no correspondence with reality or truth.
    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=hqgC1tqifV8

  2. #12
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,562
    Amen (Given)
    13077
    Amen (Received)
    27648
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Can you give an example of a non-arbitrary, non-question-begging stop (in English)?
    My grandfather would yell "Just SPEAK SPLAIN!!!"
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  3. #13
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,766
    Amen (Given)
    2027
    Amen (Received)
    5568
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    My grandfather would yell "Just SPEAK SPLAIN!!!"
    Well I think Matt is a professional Philosopher, so he thinks and speaks in terms unfamiliar to us mere mortals...
    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=hqgC1tqifV8

  4. #14
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,562
    Amen (Given)
    13077
    Amen (Received)
    27648
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Well I think Matt is a professional Philosopher, so he thinks and speaks in terms unfamiliar to us mere mortals...
    Understood... some of my colleagues got FAR more out of seminary than I did, and got infected with the language and stature.... well, they surrendered the ability to speak to common people.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  5. #15
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,766
    Amen (Given)
    2027
    Amen (Received)
    5568
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    well, they surrendered the ability to speak to common people.
    Are you calling me common!
    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=hqgC1tqifV8

  6. #16
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,562
    Amen (Given)
    13077
    Amen (Received)
    27648
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Are you calling me common!
    It's a badge I wear with honor, brother.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  7. #17
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,766
    Amen (Given)
    2027
    Amen (Received)
    5568
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    It's a badge I wear with honor, brother.
    Nothing common about a child of the Most High God, justified by the blood of Christ!
    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=hqgC1tqifV8

  8. #18
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,562
    Amen (Given)
    13077
    Amen (Received)
    27648
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Nothing common about a child of the Most High God, sanctified by the blood of Christ!
    Well, I got a double portion of "peculiar" in my people, so, yeah!
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  9. Amen seer amen'd this post.
  10. #19
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    159
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    What do you think of these propositions? Would they require either a circular, regressive, or axiomatic argument to prove them?
    1. Contradictory propositions cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.
    2. I am feeling pain.
    With the first, I think, we would have to assume that the laws of logic are universal and absolute (axiomatic). The second would be circular. How could you logically demonstrate that you are actually feeling pain to anyone but yourself with out begging the question?

    What do you think of statements where if one denies them, then one contradicts himself? For example, suppose someone makes the statement, "I exist." If he denies it, wouldn't he be contradicting himself? One would have to exist in order for him to deny it.
    Even if that is valid, that is where it ends. You could not logically move to anything else - for instance that what goes on in your mind actually corresponds to reality (the Matrix thing).

    Is the Munchausen Trilemma stating all of the possible options? What do you think of the idea where a proposition is proven true by the fact that if one denies the proposition, then one contradicts himself?

    Norman Geisler in his book, Christian Apologetics, teaches that undeniability is a test of truth. Something is true if it cannot be denied. What do you think of this?
    Again, wouldn't both require that we assume that the laws of logic are universal and absolute (axiomatic)?
    If I'm in pain, it is self-evident and undeniable that I'm in pain. How would this be fallacious?

    What do you think of axioms where if a person denies them, he contradicts himself? A person ends up contradicting himself if he denies the law of contradiction.
    Last edited by Hornet; 01-03-2020 at 11:59 AM.

  11. #20
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,766
    Amen (Given)
    2027
    Amen (Received)
    5568
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet View Post
    If I'm in pain, it is self-evident and undeniable that I'm in pain. How would this be fallacious?
    I didn't say that, I said you couldn't logically prove it to others: I said: How could you logically demonstrate that you are actually feeling pain to anyone but yourself with out begging the question?

    What do you think of axioms where if a person denies them, he contradicts himself? A person ends up contradicting himself if he denies the law of contradiction.
    And if he contradicts himself what does that tell us? It certainly does not tell us that the laws of logic are universal or inviolate. BTW - I do believe that the laws of logic are absolute since I start with God...
    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=hqgC1tqifV8

Posting Permissions

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