Wow what a load of crap (using "logic" to prove go

  • 95 Replies
  • 19385 Views
*

Masterchef

  • 3898
  • Rabble rabble rabble
Wow what a load of crap (using "logic" to prove go
« Reply #90 on: December 13, 2006, 09:43:36 AM »
Dann, let me get this straight.....you are trying to use logic to disprove logic?  :?

Even if that were possible (which it isn't), and you were intelligent enough to do it (which, made clear by your posts, you are not), you would be left with a paradox that would destroy your entire argument against logic anyway.

Your argument was so mindbogglingly stupid, I think it has made us all dumber by reading it.

Wow what a load of crap (using "logic" to prove go
« Reply #91 on: December 13, 2006, 06:49:35 PM »
Joan is a human

Joan needs to eat to survive.

Therefore all humans need to eat to survive.

Fallacious?  Yes.  False?  No.
Fallacy != False.  It just means UNRELIABLE.
on't just believe anything.  Believe what seems right.

Wow what a load of crap (using "logic" to prove go
« Reply #92 on: December 14, 2006, 07:00:28 AM »
Then you asume that people (homo sapiens) have been believing in gods/spirits/whatever for 35000 years because they were all plain stupid. Deduction is part of human thought ever since the beggining, and for 34500 years (except perhaps the greeks) atheism was not even considered as a posibility, an atheist would have been prosecuted or ridiculized, and now suddenly in less than 500 years we have found absolute truth! Come on! (and if you believe in God, then you can do the same asumption with polytheism versus monotheism 33000 years versus 2000)
The only absolute truth I find here is that it is always easier to believe that everybody else is wrong and you are right than to admit the possibility of being wrong.
Yes I am a skeptic, but I am also a skeptic over skepticism.
Quote
Dann, let me get this straight.....you are trying to use logic to disprove logic?  

Even if that were possible (which it isn't), and you were intelligent enough to do it (which, made clear by your posts, you are not), you would be left with a paradox that would destroy your entire argument against logic anyway.

Ok, I can asume that I'm not intelligent enough to do it (actually I am, but that's another matter), but why do you say that it is directly impossible? What proof do you have of it being impossible?
And actually by reaching a paradox through the logical process I can consider it a proof of the failure of the logical process for discussing some facts, creating a reasonable doubt in the logic process, I'm not stating it false, I'm stating it imperfect.
And as for being dumb... This guy called Galileo acted dumb with some weights when everyone knew that the heavier weight would reach the floor first, after all Aristoteles had said so.
So if Galileo could challenge Aristoteles definition of the world, why cant I challenge Plato's notion of ideas and concepts as something perfect?

*

Masterchef

  • 3898
  • Rabble rabble rabble
Wow what a load of crap (using "logic" to prove go
« Reply #93 on: December 14, 2006, 07:15:10 AM »
Quote from: "Dann"
Then you asume that people (homo sapiens) have been believing in gods/spirits/whatever for 35000 years because they were all plain stupid. Deduction is part of human thought ever since the beggining, and for 34500 years (except perhaps the greeks) atheism was not even considered as a posibility, an atheist would have been prosecuted or ridiculized, and now suddenly in less than 500 years we have found absolute truth! Come on! (and if you believe in God, then you can do the same asumption with polytheism versus monotheism 33000 years versus 2000)

Our race has only been around for 18,000 years.

Atheists were prosecuted because people at that time were stupid. "That person believes something different! Arrest him!".  :lol:

Quote
The only absolute truth I find here is that it is always easier to believe that everybody else is wrong and you are right than to admit the possibility of being wrong.

As you have demonstrated by attempting to disprove logic as a weak effort at supporting your beliefs.

Quote
Ok, I can asume that I'm not intelligent enough to do it (actually I am, but that's another matter), but why do you say that it is directly impossible? What proof do you have of it being impossible?

Because using logic to disprove logic is like saying that God doesn't exist because he told you he doesn't.

Quote
And actually by reaching a paradox through the logical process I can consider it a proof of the failure of the logical process for discussing some facts, creating a reasonable doubt in the logic process, I'm not stating it false, I'm stating it imperfect.

Like I said, it is impossible, so you would never actually get a paradox.

Quote
So if Galileo could challenge Aristoteles definition of the world, why cant I challenge Plato's notion of ideas and concepts as something perfect?

Because you are too stupid, and too wrong.

?

BOGWarrior89

  • 3793
  • We are as one.
Wow what a load of crap (using "logic" to prove go
« Reply #94 on: December 14, 2006, 08:41:01 AM »
Quote from: "DragonXero"
Joan is a human

Joan needs to eat to survive.

Therefore all humans need to eat to survive.

Fallacious?  Yes.  False?  No.
Fallacy != False.  It just means UNRELIABLE.


God is Love.

Love is blind.

Ray Charles is God.

Wow what a load of crap (using "logic" to prove go
« Reply #95 on: December 14, 2006, 10:48:52 AM »
Quote from: "Masterchief2219"

Because you are too stupid, and too wrong.


What difference is there between this and calling me heretic, madmen or evil?

I'll break down your belief system, let's see if you realize:
Universal Knowledge= Goodness, God, Superior Principle.
Scientist(those who know scientific laws)= Priest(those who know divine laws)
Rational Person= Faithful Follower

Non Rational Person (Stupid in your words)= Heretic, Sinner, Madmen, Wrongful
Defender of relativism (->logical conclusion attacks the notion of Universal Knowledge)= Evil.

And you're asking me how can I use logic to disprove logic, simple, I can think logically and holistically simultaneously, but that is impossible to your logical minds and therefore I'm only uttering nonsense.
But MY truth is that reason both works and doesn't, depending on how much faith you put on it.
I know how you think cause I've been there before, and I'll tell you,(but most of you won't believe me) that it doesn't work for everybody, if it works for you fine, but I want more.
And asuming I'm wrong, well, then being wrong makes me happy, therefore it is also logical to be wrong from an individual point of view.

Edit: Another paralellism:
In science you bring a subject/object to a lab to deprive it of any potential out of scientific law and make a methodic study of it so that it is within scientifical knowledge.
In religion you have initiation which is the same process, but change science for God/s, lab for holy place and methodic study for methodic ritual, and instead of becoming part of scientific knowledge it becomes consecrated and part of the religion.
In primitive cultures the same process but you usually sacrificed whatever during the ritual (that's what happens when you don't follow a method, you might break the subject).
Heck even orthodox scientists wear special clothes (robes) during their activities.
If science is the true form of knowledge, and religions, mysticism and occult theories are all wrong, then why does science use the same exact patterns of action as them?