Religion Information
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» aLxzRed replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:38am |
 Coolness: 68650 | And once again a Christian would say the same thin he takes god on faith, much like you do that the world is rational, he uses the same argument, God exists because science can't prove that he doesn't.
It is illogical to think everything is logical. I claim YOU use logic like a religion. I like logic, I like science, but ONLY a fool would think they are the be all, and end all, of existence. You make so many assumptions to make your world logical it makes me dizzy. And where is the evidence to back your assumption that the world is logical? Where is the objectivity in that assumption? If you can't answer that, yet claim I don't understand logic, it is YOU, my friend, that is walking proof that illogical exists. Update » aLxzRed wrote on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:47am Neoform says "the world is in fact logical"
I want the facts, apparently I was never fortunate enough to see these "facts" so if it is a FACT the world is logical, you should be able to prove it. I don't think you can. I think you are very illogical. Update » aLxzRed wrote on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:50am And it is YOU that claims that the world is logical, so therefore the burden of proof is on you, not me. |
| I'm feeling mont-realized right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:50am |
 Coolness: 339620 | >It is illogical to think everything is logical.
No, everything can be explained logically. PS. illogical isn't a noun. |
| I'm feeling you up right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» aLxzRed replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:51am |
| Coolness: 68650 | PROVE IT MR LOGIC!!!! Update » aLxzRed wrote on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:52am Without proof it is an assumption and not logically solid. |
| I'm feeling mont-realized right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:52am |
| Coolness: 339620 | I think you need to look up the meaning of the word, since you're having problems with concepts.
Logic, from Classical Greek λόγος logos (meaning word, reason or principle), is the study of the principles and criteria of valid inference and demonstration.
As a formal science, logic investigates and classifies the structure of statements and arguments, both through the study of formal systems of inference and through the study of arguments in natural language. The scope of logic is therefore large, ranging from core topics such as the study of fallacies and paradoxes, to specialized analyses of reasoning using probability and to arguments involving causality. Logic is also commonly used today in argumentation theory. [1] Traditionally, logic is studied as a branch of philosophy, one part of the classical trivium, which consisted of grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Since the mid-nineteenth century formal logic has been studied as the foundation of mathematics. In 1903 Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead established logic as the cornerstone of mathematics with the publication of Principia Mathematica. The development of formal logic and its implementation in computing machinery is the foundation of computer science. Update » neoform wrote on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:56am The very fact that you are able to talk about the world and the universe is proof that logic can be used to explain everything.
Everything that is falsifiable that is. |
| I'm feeling you up right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» MolocH replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:55am |
 Coolness: 226230 | Aww Neo.... come on...
Quoting wikki to prove a point is a little easy don't you think. I mean, when exanging ideas, isin't it more productive to develop your own instead of cut and pasting some else's? |
| I'm feeling quite sexay right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» moondancer replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:56am |
 Coolness: 92220 | I think they're both wrong. Why would god or anything else be illogical? Neo assumes that god is illogical and Red assumes that he isn't. There is nothing to say that the existence of some higher form doesn't logically fit into the whole picture. |
| I'm feeling hungava right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:57am |
| Coolness: 339620 | Originally Posted By MOLOCH
Aww Neo.... come on... Quoting wikki to prove a point is a little easy don't you think. I mean, when exanging ideas, isin't it more productive to develop your own instead of cut and pasting some else's? Why do people quote Einstein? If someone has already said it well, there's no reason to reinvent the wheel. Logic has been defined very well already, why should I redefine it simply because someone's refuting it. Update » neoform wrote on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:00am I think they're both wrong. Why would god or anything else be illogical? Neo assumes that god is illogical and Red assumes that he isn't. There is nothing to say that the existence of some higher form doesn't logically fit into the whole picture.
Don't confuse it. God is not supposed "a higher power" god is supposed to be THE higher power. I for one thing there's a high likelihood that there are higher powers out there. That said, I can say with a great deal of certainty that the God described in books like the bible, does not exist. |
| I'm feeling you up right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» MolocH replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 9:59am |
| Coolness: 226230 | Neo: POint taken. if nobody quotes you, you prolly haven't said a thing worth saying... |
| I'm feeling quite sexay right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» aLxzRed replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:00am |
| Coolness: 68650 | And that is the proof the world is logical?
Logic is a language that helps us to understand the world, very useful, but the world is not logic. I've had this same conversation with ppls more intelligent than you, except they understand. It seams to mean, you went to school, memorized all these "facts" without understanding. Why don't you tell me how stupid I am because no one has proven to me these "facts" that the world is logical. Much easier than giving me these supposed facts, but I guess we both know they don't exist. Once again neoform, "the world is in fact logical" WHERE ARE THE FACTS Back it up, or are you full of shit? |
| I'm feeling mont-realized right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:00am |
| Coolness: 339620 | Originally Posted By MOLOCH
if nobody quotes you, you prolly haven't said a thing worth saying... ... I didn't say that. |
| I'm feeling you up right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:02am |
 Coolness: 685545 | The Dragon In My Garage
by Carl Sagan "A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage" Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity! "Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle--but no dragon. "Where's the dragon?" you ask. "Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon." You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints. "Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floates in the air." Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire. "Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless." You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible. "Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work. Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so. The only thing you've really learned from my insistence that there's a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head. You'd wonder, if no physical tests apply, what convinced me. The possibility that it was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind. But then, why am I taking it so seriously? Maybe I need help. At the least, maybe I've seriously underestimated human fallibility. Imagine that, despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously open-minded. So you don't outright reject the notion that there's a fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold. Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you're prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you. Surely it's unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for being stodgy and unimaginative-- merely because you rendered the Scottish verdict of "not proved." Imagine that things had gone otherwise. The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour as you watch. Your infrared detector reads off-scale. The spray paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you. No matter how skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons--to say nothing about invisible ones--you must now acknowledge that there's something here, and that in a preliminary way it's consistent with an invisible, fire-breathing dragon. Now another scenario: Suppose it's not just me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you're pretty sure don't know each other, all tell you that they have dragons in their garages--but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive. All of us admit we're disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on. I'd rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren't myths at all. Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported. But they're never made when a skeptic is looking. An alternative explanation presents itself. On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked. Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon's fiery breath. But again, other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such "evidence"--no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it--is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion. |
| I'm feeling warcracktastic right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:04am |
| Coolness: 339620 | Originally Posted By ALXZRED
And that is the proof the world is logical? Logic is a language that helps us to understand the world, very useful, but the world is not logic. I've had this same conversation with ppls more intelligent than you, except they understand. It seams to mean, you went to school, memorized all these "facts" without understanding. Why don't you tell me how stupid I am because no one has proven to me these "facts" that the world is logical. Much easier than giving me these supposed facts, but I guess we both know they don't exist. Once again neoform, "the world is in fact logical" WHERE ARE THE FACTS Back it up, or are you full of shit? You really have no concept of logic. Sorry. It's like you're trying to say the universe cannot be described in words, or the universe cannot be represented through math. |
| I'm feeling you up right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» aLxzRed replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:15am |
| Coolness: 68650 | lol - You say the world is logical and I must take that on assumption, yet I' don't understand logic?
yur funny. I said the world can be represented by logic, but that does not make it logical. AND I WANT THE FACTS, can't you back it up, you said "the world is in fact logical" you say I'm stupid because I don't believe you. Give me proof like a good little rationalist. Do I ask too much? Back it up!! Update » aLxzRed wrote on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:27am This is the 3rd time I ask for these "facts" which we both know don't exist, so if you tell me I'm illogical one more time, I'm gonna laugh so hard I piss in my pants. |
| I'm feeling mont-realized right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» MolocH replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:28am |
| Coolness: 226230 | Originally Posted By DJNEOFORM
ORIGINALLY POSTED BY MOLOCH IF NOBODY QUOTES YOU, YOU PROLLY HAVEN'T SAID A THING WORTH SAYING... ... I DIDN'T SAY THAT. I know, I was just giving you a point. Sometimes, quoting is good.;) |
| I'm feeling quite sexay right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:30am |
| Coolness: 685545 | Yes and because KMFDM says it, it obviously must be true. |
| I'm feeling warcracktastic right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:31am |
| Coolness: 339620 | Originally Posted By ALXZRED
I said the world can be represented by logic, but that does not make it logical. AND I WANT THE FACTS, can't you back it up, you said "the world is in fact logical" you say I'm stupid because I don't believe you. Would you mind quoting me where I said the words "you are stupid"? You cannot prove the existence of illogic since you and I are both using logic to explain the universe. We are bound by our own means. You then say the burden is mine to prove the existence of illogic in the universe. The only illogic here is in your response. It's like you telling me that I need to prove to you the opposite of English. Or how about the opposite of a rock, or maybe show you the opposite of air. All that said, not knowing something or not being able to represent it logically (at this time) does *not* mean it is not logical or cannot be explained logically. (if something can be explained logically, then it is in fact logical). The mere fact that irrational ideas can be explains suggests that the subject is logical. Update » neoform wrote on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:33am as for the quoting thing, well, I've heard people quote Bush a lot, doesn't mean he's said anything insightful.
Merely quoting something doesn't make it valid or invalid.. it just makes it a quote. |
| I'm feeling you up right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» MolocH replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:34am |
| Coolness: 226230 | Originally Posted By SCREWHEAD YES AND BECAUSE KMFDM SAYS IT, IT OBVIOUSLY MUST BE TRUE.
Yay, you can name a band from the lyrics... I can say your name while I poop, does that. What's yer point? |
| I'm feeling quite sexay right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:36am |
| Coolness: 685545 | Like Ian said, just because you get quoted, doesn't mean that what you said has any value. People quote bush all the time, and he hasn't said one thing worth saying since he bagan to drool. |
| I'm feeling warcracktastic right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» DrGonzo replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:36am |
 Coolness: 265910 | Hahaha zinnnng! |
| I'm feeling 8-bit right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Wed Apr 25, 2007 @ 10:38am |
| Coolness: 339620 | Alright, I need to get some work done today, so I'm gonna leave off on this point.
Everything you say and think is employing logic, that's just how humans operate. Logic is merely a way or understanding and representing what we see in an attempt to understand it. If we can describe something, that makes it logical. Something illogical would be beyond description and would be utterly incompressible to the human mind. Saying such things exist is on par with saying god exists since it's completely non falsifiable. |
| I'm feeling you up right now.. | |
Religion Information
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
