TheMadFool

Linear time: The past, the present, the future have to flow into each other in a specific sequence: past-present-future. Non-linear time: The past, th...

Yes, we don't have definitive, conclusive answers but it's not a total failure. At least we know our errors and learn not to repeat them. We continue ...

Word salad

Perhaps we have to draw a distinction on the matter of consequences. The first type of consequence would be that which concerns people involved in a c...

What a coinidence! I have the same doubt. I'm not taking a course but reading introductory books on logic. P = If McDoodle works hard, he will get Dis...

It's no so much about answering questions as it is about questioning the answers. Rationality doesn't guarantee answers but it can assess the quality ...

Of course it's difficult to find people willing to listen to your ideas. The scarcity of willing people increases with the difficulty or stupidity of ...

S = All statements are false S' = All statements, but S, are false AND S is false So you're saying S can't be false because S', the equivalent stateme...

Listening to others is more important than others listening to you. We may be biased in our judgment and that usually requires hearing the other side ...

To be a hermit is a strange path to wisdom. Isn't there value in the sharing of ideas? Isn't there value in worldly knowledge? Perhaps becoming a herm...

It lacks a name that satisfies me. Anyway, what is ''comprehension''? We seem to think that comprehension is an entirely different ball game compared ...

All I can say is that you'll have to find a balance between the needs of the self and the needs of others.

The search for good women, if it means finding ONE woman in which all desired qualities are invested, is inconsistent with the well known fact that no...

Everybody is entitled to an opinion. I haven't found God, yet, but I have learned a lot through my search. Perhaps you've already passed that stage an...

You're right but that's a big IF isn't it? I'm familiar with the incomprehensible - I find math very difficult. However, that doesn't mean it's univer...

Is infinite regress preposterous? By whose standards, one may ask? How do we know that the standards of seriousness are correct? On this view, it seem...

I mean these qualities aren't disputed. Omnibenevolence, omnipotence and omniscience are universally accepted as attributes of God.

The argument doesn't work. An organism that can asexually reproduce doesn't have gender. So, women can't claim to be the ones who were reproducing ase...

It's interesting. The question is "How does an error-prone instrument detect error?" I think the observer bias (OB) is human error (HE). The data itse...

It sounds that way. But we can come to some agreement on what perfection entails e.g. omnibenevolence, omnipotence and omniscience aren't controversia...

Did your search end in disappointment? Many seem to have found something.

Well, what do you think Anselm meant by ''greatest''? To keep things simple, let's say by ''greatest'' we mean embodying all that is good. Just so you...

You seem to be implying that perfection isn't conceivable. Well, if you're looking for some universal standard then it's obvious you won't find it. We...

Suffering and happiness; barring, of course, exceptions like sadism and masochism. To think of it, even religion resorts to the suffering-happiness pa...

Predicate logic can't unpack the argument. Anyway I think the argument is flawed in many ways, as can be seen from the posts. Thanks

The truth is, there's more suffering than happiness in the world. So, pessimism seems almost obvious. An optimist, on the other hand, has to overvalue...

I think you're right. The God in premise 1 has to exist to be the greatest being imaginable. If that's so, premise 4 becomes: If God exists AND God do...

I think I'm getting there. PB states that, for a given proposition, either P is true OR P is false (but not both). There is no other truth value e.g. ...

I accept God, even if only as a concept, has many dimensions. I also agree that they, together, must form a coherent whole. However, just for the mome...

You're right. It can be used to prove weird things. But is weirdness, alone, a good enough refutation? I mean, aside from the weird conclusions we can...

Thank you. It's a much better proof than mine. I have one objection though. Differences can be perfection-related and non perfection-related. For inst...

In logic the expression ''neither...nor...'' has a specific translation: Apple is red = R Neither the apple is red nor the apple is not red = Apple is...

1. God is the greatest being imaginable 4. If God doesn't exist then I can imagine a being greater than God (a greatest being who exists) Difference b...

Thanks for your comment. No, existence in premise 1 is in imagination. So, no petitio principii fallacy. I agree to some extent. However premise 1 is ...

Bold emphasis mine. So it is excluded ''that neither Socrates is mortal nor Socrates is not mortal'' Let P = Socrates is mortal That means it is exclu...

I see. So, it's an assumption. Then I may work with assumption that we can know God. Can we now focus on my argument that there's only 1 God?

So, if LEM doesn't exclude what is this ''middle'' that's being ''excluded''? Can you give me a short proof from LNC to LEM? Let me try: ................

That's interesting but ''being'' here seems to a broader term than that which your objection depends on. In the argument ''being'' means both those wh...

And is that supposed to make my argument unsound? Trying to catch the wind somehow? We can't see unicorns but we can make the argument that it doesn't...

Ok. This is understandable. Is ''the apple is red'' AND ''the apple is not red'' also excluded? 1. If it is then why? Also raises another issue viz. w...

I'm thinking conceive = imagine Am I wrong still? What's the difference between ''conceive'' and ''imagine''? That's a good question. I've been thinki...

How do you know God is indescribable?

This is one of the many ''problems'' I'm facing. I'm totally confused on the matter. I think the question ''why?'' is ambiguous. It has two meanings o...

I still don't get it. Let me ask you 2 questions: 1. I more or less understand that PB allows either true or false. What would a TRIvalent system look...

What of all the other people who claim knowledge of God? Are they bogus? You may have a point but it's irrelevant to my argument.

And the irony is you use words to describe what, according to you, is indescribable. How do you get this kind of privileged knowledge?

And your point is?

9 All Greek to me. Anyway(Y)

:D Where in the world did I say that or anything that could be interpreted as that. I think your materialistic interpretation is a category error. It'...

Ok. Where's the contradiction? I think the PB and LEM are poorly worded - they sound very similar. I'm confused too - that's why the post. As far as I...