You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

On the Great Goat

Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:09 10950 views 63 comments
I must apologise in advance to those who are heartily sick of the many Goatist threads that have appeared in this forum over the last few weeks. But so many of those threads break with common sense and agreed reasoning that I am obliged to set out, as simply as I may, the case for the Great Goat.

We know that goats eat everything. This is undeniable.

If A eats B, B cannot eat A; a moment's reflection will show this must be true. SO it follows that either there is an indefinite gastronomic chain, such that goat 1 is eaten by goat 2, which in turn is eaten by goat 3, and hence that there is never a goat that is not eaten by some other goat; or there is one goat that eats every goat; the Great Goat.

But since goats eat everything, there is something that eats the Great Goat.

The traditional answer is of course that the Great Goat eats itself. The self-inflicted suffering of the Great Goat gives meaning to our own suffering.

Now I hope that this short commentary helps divest you of any gnawing doubts. One hopes it will put an end to the mental mastication hereabouts, but that may be too much to imbibe.

Comments (63)

Grey Vs Gray September 30, 2018 at 03:13 #216603
Maybe The Great Goat is that goat which does not eat. Why base greatness on gluttony? Why not masticational abstinance?
Shawn September 30, 2018 at 03:14 #216604
The Great Goat can only eat one thing at a time. Hence, it either eats itself indefinitely and is reduced to impotency or it commits cannibalism and eats other goats.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:16 #216606
Reply to Grey Vs Gray A goat that does not eat would be a gastronomic heresy.

It would lie alongside the heresy of the Goat that eats, but is not itself eaten.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:17 #216607
Quoting Posty McPostface
The Great Goat can only eat one thing at a time.


That's just not true. You falsely imbue the Great Goat with your own limitations.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:22 #216609
This thread belongs in the Philosophy of religion, not the lounge.

The logic demonstrated here is a direct mirror of the logic used elsewhere in the Religion section. It is a parody.

Grey Vs Gray September 30, 2018 at 03:23 #216610
Well I believe I understand. Unfortunately just as I understood I was suddenly 1,000 pounds and could not get up. Then I doubted and because I doubted, I died. I am in the belly of the beast, swimming in a lake of acid with a thousand goats screaming as their skin melts from their bones. At least I have my phone.
Shawn September 30, 2018 at 03:29 #216611
Reply to Banno

Then the goat blows up? If it can consume everything including itself then it's a case of the self containing infinite and innumerable set or more commonly known as Russells paradox?
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:32 #216612
Reply to Grey Vs Gray A Revelation! Praise the Curry!
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:37 #216614
Reply to Posty McPostface That's just an issue with setting up set theory. Nothing to do with goats.
Grey Vs Gray September 30, 2018 at 03:43 #216618
It's almost as if the goat is a combination of the devil and the devouring mother archetype.
S September 30, 2018 at 03:46 #216620
Can you imagine that than which nothing greater can be thought? Go ahead, give it a try.

You're thinking of a goat, aren't you?
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:52 #216622
Reply to Grey Vs Gray Indeed, not unlike the dance of Shiva and Kali.
Deleteduserrc September 30, 2018 at 03:52 #216623
Ha ! this reminds me of the flying pasta man! its funny when you think about how people who are are so eager to believe in god are so unsure of the flying pasta god. It's obvious that if you believe in the one, then you have to believe in the other because the reasoning is just as bad. Its funny to see all these posts on religion in here when its supposed to be a philosophy forum for people who are supposed to be a little more reasonable, and believe in pursuing the truth. It was nice to see a post that was a little more open to challenge that. it reminded me of monty python, when you said goat, it reminded me of when the knights of ni wanted a shrubbery - so random, lol, but the randomness kind of proves the point. anyway I was interested to see your particular take on this subject and am eager to see what else you have to say about religion.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:53 #216624
Reply to csalisbury The Great Goat sups on flying pasta.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 03:55 #216625
Quoting S
Can you imagine that than which nothing greater can be thought?


The argument is ancient, undeniable and simple: Goats eat everything. So for whatever you imagine, there is a goat that eats it.

Therefore goats are greater than anything imaginable.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 04:02 #216627
A sceptic?

Quoting S
Recently, there have been a few people on the forum who aren't as familiar with my stance in relation to Goats, and have had trouble understanding it. Some have even declared that they can rip it to shreds. Hence the creation of this discussion.

I'm an atheist. But what does that mean? What kind of atheist am I? It means that I don't believe that Goats exist, and it means that I don't believe that any goat or goats going by any other name or even no name at all exist. I try to be reasonable, so I try to proportion my belief to the evidence, and I try to avoid adopting conclusions that can't be supported.

In some cases, I think that it is justified to conclude that Goats doesn't exist. Those cases include each and every case whereby the existence of goats would entail a contradiction.

In other cases, I accept that it is possible that Goats exists. However, there is no case I know of where I think it would be right to conclude that there is a good enough basis to believe that Goats exist.

I discount those cases whereby Goats are merely used as label for something that I do believe exists, such as the world. That is just wordplay - a triviality.

I am aware of the traditional arguments for the existence of Goats, such as the ontological argument, the cosmological argument, and the teleological argument. I think that there are big problems with all of them.



Deleteduserrc September 30, 2018 at 04:03 #216628
all jokes aside, the cosmological argument is actually pretty interesting. A good parody would mirror its logic, and this one doesn't quite.
Marchesk September 30, 2018 at 04:04 #216629
Reply to Banno

Only if you imagine the Great Goat to be at the top of the Great Chain of Eating. But if instead you think of the Great Goat as that which makes eating possible, you would recognize the infantility of your western presuppositions.
S September 30, 2018 at 04:06 #216631
Reply to Banno That's different! That was about God! Whereas...

Look, it's just different, okay?
jorndoe September 30, 2018 at 04:23 #216636
Indeed, Everything is a Goat (Bill Capra, Philosophy Now, 2009).

Furthermore, Nigeria police hold 'robber' goat (BBC, Jan 2009), and then there's Rick.

Compelling. Undeniable. (y)
Banno September 30, 2018 at 04:50 #216641
Quoting Grey Vs Gray
The point of the "who eats the eater" argument is not to ask who eats the eater but to simplify Occam's Razor. It is simpler to say the universe IS than to state the universe was eaten, because that is what we know. To say "Goats are, and thus the universe is" is more complex than "the universe is." You get the drift.


This entirely misses the point that goats eat everything. Without acknowledging this basic, self-evident truth, this hinge proposition, your argument about universes amounts to nothing. IF goats eat everything, then the universe is eaten.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 04:54 #216643
Quoting Ram
I already explained in another thread- I believe in Goats on the basis of experiences I've had (as well as some other things). I don't believe in Goats purely on the basis of abstract arguments. So I haven't made a thread saying "here is the 100% proof Goats exists" and I don't think I will. Now I've explained why. Other people haven't seen and experienced the things I've seen and experienced.


Hear, hear.
Marchesk September 30, 2018 at 04:58 #216645
Quoting Banno
Without acknowledging this basic, self-evident truth, this hinge proposition,


Oh, that was good. You've out-goated yourself.

Banno September 30, 2018 at 04:59 #216647
Reply to jorndoe I am happy to acknowledge my debt to Billy.
Wheatley September 30, 2018 at 05:01 #216648
Banno please stop acting the goat.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 05:04 #216650
Quoting Purple Pond
There are many attempts throughout history of people trying to argue for the existence of the Great Goat through reasoned discussion. What are these apologists trying to achieve? Suppose for argument sake that the arguments for the existence of the Great Goat were sound. What type of people are going to be convinced by logical sound arguments? Those who's intelligence are capable of understanding theistic arguments and are rational enough to except them, of course. So you have intelligent and rational people accepting the existence of the Great Goat by the mere fact they possess the qualities of being intelligent and rational. But what about those people who don't possess those qualities and are not smart enough to understand and accept theistic arguments. Is it their fault that they cannot grasp them? Isn't the Great Goat being unfair? I mean it's not my fault if I can't grasp theistic arguments for the existence of the Great Goat.

It's only fair that everyone get's the chance to discover the Great Goat, and not those who are lucky to posses certain qualities. Is the Great Goat unfair?


The Great Goat is beyond fair and unfair, rational and irrational. We eaters will each in our turn be eaten.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 05:28 #216653
Reply to csalisbury Here is the cosmological argument as presented by Billy Capra:

The argument in question is a cosmological argument against goatism. The argument runs as follows:

Premise 1: Goats eat everything.

Premise 2: Eating is asymmetric. That is, if A eats B, then B does not eat A.

Therefore:

Conclusion: There is at least one non-goat.


The absurdity of this argument is obvious.
unenlightened September 30, 2018 at 09:04 #216673
Quoting Banno
If A eats B, B cannot eat A; a moment's reflection will show this must be true.


A moment's reflection shows me that this is the opposite of the truth. We all eat worms, don't we? And we understand that eventually we will be worm-food. Your principle does not even apply to individuals, as most of us have experienced being eaten from the inside out by something we have ingested.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 09:49 #216680
Reply to unenlightened A good rule of thumb is that what is shown to be true by a moment of consideration will be shown to be false with due consideration.
unenlightened September 30, 2018 at 10:32 #216683
Reply to Banno A moment's consideration shows that to be true.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 10:35 #216685
Reply to unenlightened Perhaps we might agree to give the issue due consideration?
unenlightened September 30, 2018 at 11:58 #216701
I think we might agree that in this case a moment's consideration is due consideration, if not rather more than is due. Whereof one cannot eat, thereof one must remain un-sated.
BaldMenFighting September 30, 2018 at 17:37 #216790
Reply to Banno It's non sequitur that a Great Goat must exist.

It's non sequitur that if A eats B, then B cannot eat A, for example, partially eaten B can still kill A, and also, B can just kill A before A is even aware that it's under attack.

It's arbitrary that goats eat everything. In fact they don't in reality eat everything.

It's counter-intuitive that an hypothetical Great Goat would devour itself, when it could devour something else, it's a Great Goat after all.

There haven't been any other goat threads that l know of.

Other than that, you seem a bit confused,
Sir2u September 30, 2018 at 22:30 #216876
Quoting Banno
We know that goats eat everything. This is undeniable.


My friend has both goats and sheep, never has a sheep been eaten by a goat. First premise wrong.

Quoting Banno
If A eats B, B cannot eat A; a moment's reflection will show this must be true.


If B has been eaten already this is true, but if B eats A first then it is not.

Quoting Banno
SO it follows that either there is an indefinite gastronomic chain, such that goat 1 is eaten by goat 2, which in turn is eaten by goat 3, and hence that there is never a goat that is not eaten by some other goat;


Actually it does not follow, there could quite easily be a case where one goat is more interested in eating your underpants and has no interest in other goats. Or several goats eating other goats at the same time which would make it a multi-thread gastronomic chain instead of an indefinite gastronomic chain.

Quoting Banno
or there is one goat that eats every goat; the Great Goat.


Either goats would have to reproduce like rabbits before being eaten or the Great Goat would soon go hungry and become non-existent.

Quoting Banno
But since goats eat everything, there is something that eats the Great Goat.


Already dismissed as a fallacy.

Quoting Banno
The traditional answer is of course that the Great Goat eats itself. The self-inflicted suffering of the Great Goat gives meaning to our own suffering.


OH NO! That would start another thread on infinite eternity. Please don't do that.

Quoting Banno
Now I hope that this short commentary helps divest you of any gnawing doubts. One hopes it will put an end to the mental mastication hereabouts, but that may be too much to imbibe.


Now I hope that this reply to your short commentary helps divest you of any chewing (excuse the pun) doubts. One hopes it will put an end to the mental masturbation hereabouts, but that may be too much to imbibe.

But all is not lost, there is still hope for the Great Goat.
A benevolent Great Goat would not want his followers to suffer, so at the end of their non cannibalistic lives he invites then to the Great Pasture in the sky. And then eats them.
Sir2u September 30, 2018 at 22:40 #216879
Quoting BaldMenFighting
There haven't been any other goat threads that l know of.

Other than that, you seem a bit confused,


So you don't know Banno.

That's your hard luck.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 23:18 #216891
Quoting Sir2u
My friend has both goats and sheep, never has a sheep been eaten by a goat. First premise wrong.


That some particular sheep has not yet been eaten by a goat. But it does not follow that it will not be eaten by a goat at some later stage.

Indeed, most of the criticisms here have been to the effect it is not the case that goats eat everything. That this thought could be entertained by otherwise intelligent folk shows us clearly the failings of what passes for education on our times. That this very core principle of civilised life could be treated so is an abomination.

Quoting BaldMenFighting
There haven't been any other goat threads that l know of.


I rest my case.
Sir2u September 30, 2018 at 23:27 #216895
Quoting Banno
Indeed, most of the criticisms here have been to the effect it is not the case that goats eat everything.


As is the case of a god knowing everything, facts that cannot be proven are not facts. Show show your evidence.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 23:29 #216897
Reply to Sir2u Evidence? Doubt makes no sense here. This is not a question that is liable to the vagaries of justification.

That is, your doubt tells us nothing about goats, but much about you.
Sir2u September 30, 2018 at 23:43 #216901
Quoting Banno
Evidence? Doubt makes no sense here. This is not a question that is liable to the vagaries of justification.

That is, your doubt tells us nothing about goats, but much about you.


Oh, now I see the light. Of course all i need is faith, the rest will follow.

I am convinced, I have become a believer.

Hail the Great Goat.

Do you think he would mind if we called him GG from now on, The Great Goat is just so over whelming.
Banno September 30, 2018 at 23:44 #216902
See this, for example:

Quoting FordFestivaPhilosophy
In order to believe in unconsumed objects, one does not have to accept that this objects are not contingent on the Great Goat. One could simply believe that are necessarily existing and sustained through the forthcoming consumption by some goat. This can be through some non-voluntary facet of the Great Goat's existence through which he does this. There are certain problems which may arise, but this seems to be a far more plausible view than to simply deny the existence of unconsumed objects. Thus, if there is something I’m overlooking I would love to hear it, but it seems far fetched that the baggage with a Leibnizian view of unconsumed objects could be more concerning than that with fictionalism.


This is Dreadful. Everything is consumed by some goat; It is this immanent consumption that is the source of the manifestation of that which is consumed.

Things only exist in order to be eaten by a goat.

Banno September 30, 2018 at 23:46 #216903
Reply to Sir2u There are more suitable epithets. The Bearded One; The Great Masticator; Swallower of All.
Hanover October 01, 2018 at 00:39 #216927
Goats eat anything, not everything.

Where did goats come from? Isn't that the fundamental question, regardless of the failed attempts to answer it?
Sir2u October 01, 2018 at 00:48 #216931
Quoting Hanover
Where did goats come from? Isn't that the fundamental question, regardless of the failed attempts to answer it?


The Great Goat is, and always has been. He is timeless and exist everywhere at all times.

Have a little faith and just believe.
Banno October 01, 2018 at 01:07 #216934
Reply to Sir2u Well said, my brother from an udder mother.
Sir2u October 01, 2018 at 02:01 #216943
Reply to Banno :up: :point: :pray:
Sir2u October 01, 2018 at 02:01 #216944
:rofl:
khaled October 01, 2018 at 04:52 #216981
I love this thread so much but alas all that begins must come to be eaten by a goat. (not if I can do anything about it by refreshing this page with this comment so more people can see it)
Hanover October 01, 2018 at 15:40 #217081
Quoting Sir2u
The Great Goat is, and always has been. He is timeless and exist everywhere at all times.

Have a little faith and just believe.


But this misses the point. Even if I have no faith at all in the eternal and ubiquitous existence of the Great Goat, my question of his origin still remains.
Banno October 01, 2018 at 21:03 #217200
Quoting Hanover
But this misses the point.


Indeed.
Sir2u October 01, 2018 at 23:33 #217234
Quoting Hanover
But this misses the point. Even if I have no faith at all in the eternal and ubiquitous existence of the Great Goat, my question of his origin still remains.


No, it clearly addressed your question. Being everything he is the origin, the end and everything in the middle. There was nothing before him and naught will there be after him because he is all there is.
Banno October 02, 2018 at 00:07 #217239
Reply to Sir2u Indeed; everything is a goat.
Wayfarer October 02, 2018 at 00:46 #217247
I'm actually interested in philosophy of religion. And it's interesting that there is a foment of threads about spiritual and metaphysical issues on this forum at this time. Yes, many of the comments are pretty random and idiosyncratic, but not all of them. I see the task as trying to map the ideas against history, religion and philosophy, but also to consider what lies beyond all of them as they are currently conceived. But going beyond them requires understanding them at least to some degree, and there's a general lack of it in the so-called 'plain language' and analytical philosophy that Banno seems to favour. Maybe this forum will become overwhelmed by these threads and it will be time to move on. But resorting to ridicule is not going to help.
Banno October 02, 2018 at 01:08 #217251
Reply to Wayfarer There is a pattern to the grammar of some religious thought that runs parallel to Goatism.

So for example one of the aspects of Capra's original paper that I find revealing is the way in which it starts half way through an argument, assuming familiarity with other Goatist materials.

I also read his article as a critique of my own views, borrowed from Wittgenstein, that there are truths that it makes no sense to doubt. I've played on that in some of the posts in this thread. The undeniable precept that goats eat everything parallels Moore's "here are two hands".

Goatism ridicules the ridiculous; and this is not such a bad thing to do. But in so doing it keeps an eye on the ridiculous in my own ideas, and the ideas of others.

Banno October 02, 2018 at 01:10 #217252
Once one has embraced goatism, any intuitions rooted in a previous non-goatist paradigm can be rejected as unreliable.
Wayfarer October 02, 2018 at 01:11 #217253
David Stove would be chuckling in his grave. Metaphorically, of course.
Banno October 02, 2018 at 01:51 #217263
Quoting tenderfoot
I would like to argue for the existence of some “step” after one’s life on Earth and before Heaven/ Hell in which all human beings have the opportunity to choose Jesus as their Lord. If there is a chance to choose God after death, then salvation is not evil and God in fact it is maximally good, just, and merciful (because eternal communion with God is offered to all who may choose it!) This maintains human free will and the choice to love God (it is not compulsory) while still allowing those who seek goodness in this world to find the omnibenevolent God, regardless of their knowledge of Him in the physical, temporal world. Without this step, I don’t see a way to reconcile the unequal access to God on this Earth with eternal damnation. If that were the case, it seems that salvation is tinged with evil in a way humans cannot defend without appealing to “God’s plan being too wonderful to understand.”


Here's a fine example from the Followers of the Son showing how a rejection of suffering leads to irrationality. Since the Great Goat eats itself, suffering is built into the vary nature of the world. Tenderfoot's ad hoc fabrication of a New Limbo shows clearly his self-demeaning refusal to accept Goatism.
Sir2u October 06, 2018 at 00:24 #218170
Something else about goats that I just found out, they like human piss.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/goats-airlifted-national-park-developing-thirst-human-urine-084218375.html
khaled October 06, 2018 at 07:13 #218245
Reply to Wayfarer if plain language is so lacking why not show us exactly which part of great Banno's teachings is flawed in as many words as you like. I do agree this post isn't gonna resolve any issues, but neither did any of the ones I read that are supposedly more in depth. You're welcome to have an in depth discussion here instead of accusing the guy's logic of being too blunt
Wayfarer October 06, 2018 at 08:18 #218253
Reply to khaled Well I agree with Banno there’s a fair amount of goatism on this board right now but you have to realise, goats will eat almost anything.
khaled October 06, 2018 at 08:41 #218254
Reply to Wayfarer yes indeed brother. Now what's wrong with goatism as you've claimed you would show earlier?
Wheatley October 06, 2018 at 08:48 #218255
@Banno, does the Great Goat eat goats that eat themselves? Because if not, then there is The Great Goat paradox: the Great Goat eats only every Goat that doesn't eat itself. Does the Great Goat eat itself?
Banno October 09, 2018 at 00:20 #218937
User image

Bible, Koran...
fdrake October 09, 2018 at 18:03 #219136
I heard that the Great Goat is in a goat pen, but really it's the rest of being which is in the pen.