Forum
ยป
ITT: I solve the most difficult philosophical/existential questions you have
07-29-2019, 01:53 PM
-
#91
- jeshelton
- Registered User
-
- jeshelton
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2013
- Age: 43
- Posts: 11,801
- Rep Power: 267554
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
So wincel is a Christian? What about other religions? Are they lesser/greater, or invalidate the principals of mathematics as well?I grasped what you said. It's also stupid as hell. God cannot define a one to one function from {0} onto {0,1} because no such function can exist. Period.
BTW laws of physics could be imagined to be alterable by God, so it is possible Jesus turned wine into water, etc in principle, even though it would break a lot of chit. On the other hand, the laws of logic are much higher than that. Even God is constrained by them.
BTW laws of physics could be imagined to be alterable by God, so it is possible Jesus turned wine into water, etc in principle, even though it would break a lot of chit. On the other hand, the laws of logic are much higher than that. Even God is constrained by them.
445/340/545
07-29-2019, 02:02 PM
-
#92
- Brozart
- dunno
-
- Brozart
- dunno
- Join Date: Apr 2007
- Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Posts: 27,524
- Rep Power: 313692
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
What would it mean for something to not be constrained by logic?
For example, we know 1 is not equal to 0, assuming the basic axioms we take from ZFC. There is no way for God or anyone else to prove otherwise within this logical framework. It is truly logically impossible to prove a false statement as true. God's reality need not have these axioms, but God is clearly constrained by the laws of logic. He cannot make something that is false true.
God cannot construct a one to one function mapping say the set {0,1} onto the set {0,1,2,3}. This is impossible. Not even God could do it.
For example, we know 1 is not equal to 0, assuming the basic axioms we take from ZFC. There is no way for God or anyone else to prove otherwise within this logical framework. It is truly logically impossible to prove a false statement as true. God's reality need not have these axioms, but God is clearly constrained by the laws of logic. He cannot make something that is false true.
God cannot construct a one to one function mapping say the set {0,1} onto the set {0,1,2,3}. This is impossible. Not even God could do it.
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
I grasped what you said. It's also stupid as hell. God cannot define a one to one function from {0} onto {0,1} because no such function can exist. Period.
BTW laws of physics could be imagined to be alterable by God, so it is possible Jesus turned wine into water, etc in principle, even though it would break a lot of chit. On the other hand, the laws of logic are much higher than that. Even God is constrained by them.
BTW laws of physics could be imagined to be alterable by God, so it is possible Jesus turned wine into water, etc in principle, even though it would break a lot of chit. On the other hand, the laws of logic are much higher than that. Even God is constrained by them.
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
The reason you're driven to acquire so much knowledge and understanding is likely due to a desperate aversion to admitting to yourself thatthe"why" is incomprehensible to you. I'm not saying it's comprehensible to anyone, I'm saying that you demand that all of existence fits into the scope of your understanding and your reason, as we all inherently do.I just showed you something that can't be done by God or anyone else. I didn't make these rules. It's logic. It's like saying God can divide by zero. It's nuts. You're nuts.
Logic is formalised reason. Reason is, apparently, inescapable for we humans. So what is its value? You say that even "God" cannot escape logic - do you really think that the human brain, the human mind, has no limit, that anything that we cannot understand simply cannot be? That's incredibly arrogant, anthropocentric, ignorant.
It is a confronting realisation, and one that we, for obvious reasons, cannot fully comprehend, but a man of science must admit that there are necessarily limits to human thought.
To truly adhere to reason and to logic it's necessary to acknowledge their limits. You posit that God is illogical, because if God created everything then he must have created himself, but how is that possible? The same applies to logic. If there is nothing outside logic, did logic create itself? Can logic explain itself and the context in which it exists?
Existence is not constrained by logic, or reason, our minds (and, therefore, our understanding of existence) are.
You are demanding that life, the universe, existence conform to your necessarily limited capacity to comprehend. It's nonsensical.
fukn Brozart
I'm a hugger
07-29-2019, 02:03 PM
-
#93
- Jacobcapra
- AAS Free since '93
-
- Jacobcapra
- AAS Free since '93
- Join Date: Apr 2015
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, United States
- Age: 33
- Posts: 15,933
- Rep Power: 174320
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
why can you imagine that the laws of physics can be altered by God, by not that of logic?BTW laws of physics could be imagined to be alterable by God, so it is possible Jesus turned wine into water, etc in principle, even though it would break a lot of chit. On the other hand, the laws of logic are much higher than that. Even God is constrained by them.
**Georgia Crew**
**Mechanical Engineering Crew**
**2018 Aesthetics Crew**
01/02/2018 - 202.2 lb.
Current - 181.4 lb. (1/23/18)
07-29-2019, 02:06 PM
-
#94
- Jacobcapra
- AAS Free since '93
-
- Jacobcapra
- AAS Free since '93
- Join Date: Apr 2015
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, United States
- Age: 33
- Posts: 15,933
- Rep Power: 174320
-
-
Originally Posted By Brozart⏩
Imagine, Brozart being infinitely more capable of thinking outside the box than Wincel.The reason you're driven to acquire so much knowledge and understanding is likely due to a desperate aversion to admitting to yourself thatthe"why" is incomprehensible to you. I'm not saying it's comprehensible to anyone, I'm saying that you demand that all of existence fits into the scope of your understanding and your reason, as we all inherently do.
Logic is formalised reason. Reason is, apparently, inescapable for we humans. So what is its value? You say that even "God" cannot escape logic - do you really think that the human brain, the human mind, has no limit, that anything that we cannot understand simply cannot be? That's incredibly arrogant, anthropocentric, ignorant.
It is a confronting realisation, and one that we, for obvious reasons, cannot fully comprehend, but a man of science must admit that there are necessarily limits to human thought.
To truly adhere to reason and to logic it's necessary to acknowledge their limits. You posit that God is illogical, because if God created everything then he must have created himself, but how is that possible? The same applies to logic. If there is nothing outside logic, did logic create itself? Can logic explain itself and the context in which it exists?
Existence is not constrained by logic, or reason, our minds (and, therefore, our understanding of existence) are.
You are demanding that life, the universe, existence conform to your necessarily limited capacity to comprehend. It's nonsensical.
Logic is formalised reason. Reason is, apparently, inescapable for we humans. So what is its value? You say that even "God" cannot escape logic - do you really think that the human brain, the human mind, has no limit, that anything that we cannot understand simply cannot be? That's incredibly arrogant, anthropocentric, ignorant.
It is a confronting realisation, and one that we, for obvious reasons, cannot fully comprehend, but a man of science must admit that there are necessarily limits to human thought.
To truly adhere to reason and to logic it's necessary to acknowledge their limits. You posit that God is illogical, because if God created everything then he must have created himself, but how is that possible? The same applies to logic. If there is nothing outside logic, did logic create itself? Can logic explain itself and the context in which it exists?
Existence is not constrained by logic, or reason, our minds (and, therefore, our understanding of existence) are.
You are demanding that life, the universe, existence conform to your necessarily limited capacity to comprehend. It's nonsensical.
**Georgia Crew**
**Mechanical Engineering Crew**
**2018 Aesthetics Crew**
01/02/2018 - 202.2 lb.
Current - 181.4 lb. (1/23/18)
07-29-2019, 02:11 PM
-
#95
- jeshelton
- Registered User
-
- jeshelton
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2013
- Age: 43
- Posts: 11,801
- Rep Power: 267554
-
-
Originally Posted By Brozart⏩
Taking down my Live. Laugh. Love. sign above the fireplace and replacing with this.The reason you're driven to acquire so much knowledge and understanding is likely due to a desperate aversion to admitting to yourself thatthe"why" is incomprehensible to you. I'm not saying it's comprehensible to anyone, I'm saying that you demand that all of existence fits into the scope of your understanding and your reason, as we all inherently do.
Logic is formalised reason. Reason is, apparently, inescapable for we humans. So what is its value? You say that even "God" cannot escape logic - do you really think that the human brain, the human mind, has no limit, that anything that we cannot understand simply cannot be? That's incredibly arrogant, anthropocentric, ignorant.
It is a confronting realisation, and one that we, for obvious reasons, cannot fully comprehend, but a man of science must admit that there are necessarily limits to human thought.
To truly adhere to reason and to logic it's necessary to acknowledge their limits. You posit that God is illogical, because if God created everything then he must have created himself, but how is that possible? The same applies to logic. If there is nothing outside logic, did logic create itself? Can logic explain itself and the context in which it exists?
Existence is not constrained by logic, or reason, our minds (and, therefore, our understanding of existence) are.
You are demanding that life, the universe, existence conform to your necessarily limited capacity to comprehend. It's nonsensical.
Logic is formalised reason. Reason is, apparently, inescapable for we humans. So what is its value? You say that even "God" cannot escape logic - do you really think that the human brain, the human mind, has no limit, that anything that we cannot understand simply cannot be? That's incredibly arrogant, anthropocentric, ignorant.
It is a confronting realisation, and one that we, for obvious reasons, cannot fully comprehend, but a man of science must admit that there are necessarily limits to human thought.
To truly adhere to reason and to logic it's necessary to acknowledge their limits. You posit that God is illogical, because if God created everything then he must have created himself, but how is that possible? The same applies to logic. If there is nothing outside logic, did logic create itself? Can logic explain itself and the context in which it exists?
Existence is not constrained by logic, or reason, our minds (and, therefore, our understanding of existence) are.
You are demanding that life, the universe, existence conform to your necessarily limited capacity to comprehend. It's nonsensical.
445/340/545
07-29-2019, 02:24 PM
-
#96
Originally Posted By Jacobcapra⏩
My point was that God has limits. There are constraints. I believe I made my case quite clear.You calling me numbnuts right now is ironic.
You're talking about pointless things, whether God can violate mathematical logic or make 1=0. THAT'S your roadblock? Not how the entire universe could have seemingly sprung out of nothing, all contained in an infinitesimal point? Or how Jesus endured torture that would have killed several men over, only to raise from the dead 3 days later?
Stuck in a small world defined only by logic, rules, and laws....
You're talking about pointless things, whether God can violate mathematical logic or make 1=0. THAT'S your roadblock? Not how the entire universe could have seemingly sprung out of nothing, all contained in an infinitesimal point? Or how Jesus endured torture that would have killed several men over, only to raise from the dead 3 days later?
Stuck in a small world defined only by logic, rules, and laws....
07-29-2019, 02:25 PM
-
#97
07-29-2019, 02:26 PM
-
#98
- Jacobcapra
- AAS Free since '93
-
- Jacobcapra
- AAS Free since '93
- Join Date: Apr 2015
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, United States
- Age: 33
- Posts: 15,933
- Rep Power: 174320
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
you THINK God has limits. How can you definitively say something has limits, when by definition, you cannot fully know it?My point was that God has limits. There are constraints. I believe I made my case quite clear.
The fact you say these things like they're facts and not just your opinions speaks to some deep-seated narcissism and arrogance.
**Georgia Crew**
**Mechanical Engineering Crew**
**2018 Aesthetics Crew**
01/02/2018 - 202.2 lb.
Current - 181.4 lb. (1/23/18)
07-29-2019, 02:29 PM
-
#99
Originally Posted By Jacobcapra⏩
I suppose you can call absurd reasoning thinking outside the box. Again, there are only two such functions and neither is onto. These are facts that cannot be changed by God or anyone else.Imagine, Brozart being infinitely more capable of thinking outside the box than Wincel.
Existence is completely constrained by logic. That is why a thing cannot be true and not true at the same time.
07-29-2019, 02:31 PM
-
#100
07-29-2019, 02:31 PM
-
#101
Originally Posted By Jacobcapra⏩
Oh by definition...so please tell me the definition of God.you THINK God has limits. How can you definitively say something has limits, when by definition, you cannot fully know it?
The fact you say these things like they're facts and not just your opinions speaks to some deep-seated narcissism and arrogance.
The fact you say these things like they're facts and not just your opinions speaks to some deep-seated narcissism and arrogance.
07-29-2019, 02:38 PM
-
#102
- Brozart
- dunno
-
- Brozart
- dunno
- Join Date: Apr 2007
- Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Posts: 27,524
- Rep Power: 313692
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
Lmao! Strong response.I suppose you can call absurd reasoning thinking outside the box. Again, there are only two such functions and neither is onto. These are facts that cannot be changed by God or anyone else.
Existence is completely constrained by logic. That is why a thing cannot be true and not true at the same time.
Existence is completely constrained by logic. That is why a thing cannot be true and not true at the same time.
Okay wincel, the human brain has no limits, it's infinitely powerful and we have no constraints. What we see and what we understand must be all that possibly could be, because if we couldn't understand it, how could it be?
Idiot.
fukn Brozart
I'm a hugger
07-29-2019, 02:43 PM
-
#103
- Muzzlrpress
- Join Date: Jan 2011
- Location: United States
- Posts: 104,332
- Rep Power: 993953
-
-
I love u guys
I'm back, bitches!
07-29-2019, 02:47 PM
-
#104
- Lunatic
- The Cripple
-
- Lunatic
- The Cripple
- Join Date: Nov 2002
- Location: United States
- Posts: 57,101
- Rep Power: 494160
-
-
Originally Posted By Avalanche3319⏩
AwareThe answer is 42
Came in expecting people mentioning TheAdlerian.
Originally Posted By xoyr⏩
Leaving satisfiedLOL this, all that's missing is TheAdlerian
Originally Posted By Brozart⏩
LmaoLmao! Strong response.
Okay wincel, the human brain has no limits, it's infinitely powerful and we have no constraints. What we see and what we understand must be all that possibly could be, because if we couldn't understand it, how could it be?
Idiot.
Okay wincel, the human brain has no limits, it's infinitely powerful and we have no constraints. What we see and what we understand must be all that possibly could be, because if we couldn't understand it, how could it be?
Idiot.
AcetylCoA gets reps
"God your dunce." - Swept
LSU Tigers/Washington Nationals
07-29-2019, 02:49 PM
-
#105
- Cass40
- Quarantined Finja
-
- Cass40
- Quarantined Finja
- Join Date: Oct 2013
- Posts: 29,243
- Rep Power: 441318
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
The omnipotent being that started everything and is all knowing and all loving.Oh by definition...so please tell me the definition of God.
This kind of God doesn't probably exist but there is something more powerful than humans I would assume since our knowledge is pretty limited.
07-29-2019, 02:59 PM
-
#106
Originally Posted By Brozart⏩
Human brain has definite limits. You can only store so much information and compute things so quickly. That doesn't change the laws of logic, which impose strict constraints on existence.Lmao! Strong response.
Okay wincel, the human brain has no limits, it's infinitely powerful and we have no constraints. What we see and what we understand must be all that possibly could be, because if we couldn't understand it, how could it be?
Idiot.
Okay wincel, the human brain has no limits, it's infinitely powerful and we have no constraints. What we see and what we understand must be all that possibly could be, because if we couldn't understand it, how could it be?
Idiot.
07-29-2019, 03:02 PM
-
#107
Originally Posted By Cass40⏩
How do we know such a being exists? And also, omnipotence itself is logically contradictory. There is still the question of the nature of this being. What is meant by being here? And if it started everything, that must include itself. It really offers no better explanation than the initial singularity. We are still left with no understanding of the origin.The omnipotent being that started everything and is all knowing and all loving.
This kind of God doesn't probably exist but there is something more powerful than humans I would assume since our knowledge is pretty limited.
This kind of God doesn't probably exist but there is something more powerful than humans I would assume since our knowledge is pretty limited.
07-29-2019, 03:21 PM
-
#108
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
Lol **** logic brah. Only evidence matters. Logic just helps us make sense of new systems. As our brains are constrained; the logic we invent is also always potentially constrained.Human brain has definite limits. You can only store so much information and compute things so quickly. That doesn't change the laws of logic, which impose strict constraints on existence.
07-29-2019, 03:46 PM
-
#109
Originally Posted By jmurat⏩
One truth I absolutely know beyond anything is that I exist. This also means I don't not exist. God cannot change this. If I exist then I don't not exist. God could end my existence, but that wouldn't invalidate the truth value of the claimed statement that "If I exist,I don't not exist." I know I exist too, and it is the most certain thing I know.Lol **** logic brah. Only evidence matters. Logic just helps us make sense of new systems. As our brains are constrained; the logic we invent is also always potentially constrained.
07-29-2019, 04:04 PM
-
#110
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
I would think the Latter is true. The mathematical languages we've created are likely a bad attempt at measuring reality.Ok here is one.
Is math real? That is to say, do mathematical structures actually exist and is our universe embedded in one or is the actual reality this physical universe, and is mathematics something we invent within the constraints of our existence? Or are there other possibilities entirely?
Is math real? That is to say, do mathematical structures actually exist and is our universe embedded in one or is the actual reality this physical universe, and is mathematics something we invent within the constraints of our existence? Or are there other possibilities entirely?
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
07-29-2019, 04:06 PM
-
#111
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
I'm not arguing about God. Im arguing about the supremacy of logic vs evidence.One truth I absolutely know beyond anything is that I exist. This also means I don't not exist. God cannot change this. If I exist then I don't not exist. God could end my existence, but that wouldn't invalidate the truth value of the claimed statement that "If I exist,I don't not exist." I know I exist too, and it is the most certain thing I know.
Sure you can be sure about you. Classical logic says 1=1, until quantum mechanics came about and now its something ?=1,0
No matter how solid your logic; a man of science will appreciate that you should always give more weight to evidence.
Consider a real world example:
-Ignaz Semmelweis says he has evidence if you touch a dead person; you can die too.
-World: fk outta here .. no logic, reason or sense. Guy eventually was admitted to mental institution where he dies.
-Germ theory is formulated. Its all logical now.
07-29-2019, 04:07 PM
-
#112
- BigBallsMcgee
- Registered User
-
- BigBallsMcgee
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2018
- Age: 35
- Posts: 35,726
- Rep Power: 48512
-
-
What's the argument against suicide for those with crap lives that haven't improved with time and effort?
07-29-2019, 04:09 PM
-
#113
Originally Posted By jmurat⏩
Quantum never says that lol.I'm not arguing about God. Im arguing about the supremacy of logic vs evidence.
Sure you can be sure about you. Classical logic says 1=1, until quantum mechanics came about and now its something ?=1,0
No matter how solid your logic; a man of science will appreciate that you should always give more weight to evidence.
Consider a real world example:
-Ignaz Semmelweis says he has evidence if you touch a dead person; you can die too.
-World: fk outta here .. no logic, reason or sense. Guy eventually was admitted to mental institution where he dies.
-Germ theory is formulated. Its all logical now.
Sure you can be sure about you. Classical logic says 1=1, until quantum mechanics came about and now its something ?=1,0
No matter how solid your logic; a man of science will appreciate that you should always give more weight to evidence.
Consider a real world example:
-Ignaz Semmelweis says he has evidence if you touch a dead person; you can die too.
-World: fk outta here .. no logic, reason or sense. Guy eventually was admitted to mental institution where he dies.
-Germ theory is formulated. Its all logical now.
Nobody is ever going to produce an onto function from a 1 element set to a 2 element set. It immediately follows from the definition of function that this is impossible.
07-29-2019, 04:15 PM
-
#114
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By Hicksbrah⏩
There is likely an intelligent creator and a creator that created that creator and so on. Infinite regress. lol There is no answer.Impossible to prove either way regardless of what anyone proposes. But unfortunately to trigger Misc atheists, God is the most logical explanation so far. (talking about life existentially, moreso as why it exists in the first place, not mechanistically as to *how* exactly it happened)
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
07-29-2019, 04:16 PM
-
#115
07-29-2019, 04:23 PM
-
#116
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By Muzzlrpress⏩
If you could dematerialize and come out the other side of the big bang from an event horizon in another universe and so on and so forth. You'd keep going forever. All speculative of course.If you wen't back in time as far as you could, would you ever reach a destination, or would you keep traveling forever?
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
07-29-2019, 04:29 PM
-
#117
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
Bruv i aint a philosopher so to hell with ontology lol... i was more implying the quantum decoherence phenomenon. A particle only takes its classical physical shape upon an information transfer event. Like the cat: ? before, then dead or alive upon observation.Quantum never says that lol.
Nobody is ever going to produce an onto function from a 1 element set to a 2 element set. It immediately follows from the definition of function that this is impossible.
Nobody is ever going to produce an onto function from a 1 element set to a 2 element set. It immediately follows from the definition of function that this is impossible.
Dont sit on your philosophical arguments to massage your ego. I was more arguing about why evidence should trump logic.
07-29-2019, 04:32 PM
-
#118
- l2ambo
- Registered User
-
- l2ambo
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Location: Canada
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,380
- Rep Power: 8260
-
-
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
Distance and time are the same thing but you differentiated them.Basically, measured distances between objects are increasing over time. We think of it as if space is stretching out or inflating in a sense. That means if you look back in time far enough, you eventually get to a point where everything is really close together, and too close to make any sense of any idea of distance or time.
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
07-29-2019, 04:36 PM
-
#119
- FailedPotential
- Registered User
-
- FailedPotential
- Registered User
- Join Date: Oct 2014
- Posts: 14,376
- Rep Power: 59586
-
-
Our intuitions are flawed about things, this is why we use tools such a mathematics to prove something is correct or not.
For everyday things, are intuitions and common sense/logic apply very well.
For other things, harder to answer questions, not so much.
Why is this? We evolved and adapted to things that helped us pass on our genes, and didn't develop abilities to know things that were not necessary for that task.
To think you can solve everything with your current tools, or conceive of everything with your current tools is just... trying to think of a word... I don't even know. The fking audacity! There, that sounds good.
For everyday things, are intuitions and common sense/logic apply very well.
For other things, harder to answer questions, not so much.
Why is this? We evolved and adapted to things that helped us pass on our genes, and didn't develop abilities to know things that were not necessary for that task.
To think you can solve everything with your current tools, or conceive of everything with your current tools is just... trying to think of a word... I don't even know. The fking audacity! There, that sounds good.
Fak U say? Cheeky kent ya, i'll fakin fak ya, ya lil sloot
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts