Arcane Sandwich

I honestly don't know what to say. It's a fascinating topic. Evidently there's such a thing as lived time. Otherwise, solitary confinement wouldn't be...

In D&D, the only dragons that breathe fire are the red dragons. Other dragons breathe ice, or lightning, or acid, etc.

I honestly think that time is the most difficult philosophical topic of all. It's more difficult than the topics of space, reality, God, and even Bein...

Your argument looks much better! Here's the structure: P1) p P2) p ? q C1) ? q P3) q ? r P4) r ? s C2) ? s P5) s ? t P6) t ? u C3) ? u It's a valid ar...

"For some unique x, for some unique y, x is the evening star, y is the morning star, and x is identical to y."

My theory has been refuted then. Here's how I would write it, if I had any say on the syntax: ?x?y((Ex & My) & (x=y))

Wanna hear my theory about that? When you were formulating it, you sensed on some level that the iota operator makes formulas look ugly, so you tried ...

Why are the parentheses necessary in this case? That's another thing that makes such a formula really ugly. Off topic, I know, but since you brought i...

Considering the preceding Hegelian thesis, I have decided to update the OP of this Thread. I will incorporate a slightly modified version of 's argume...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYYGKCanqfA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnlXrTfMx-s

Here's a song that talks about that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7C40HIt9g

https://youtube.com/embed/5DkZvJ4LCOo?si=mGGgg4ftutHyXqBM

Ideally you'd want to have an argument that is as short as possible, as far as the number of premises go. When I see a lengthy argument, the first thi...

No, it isn't. We've been over this in this thread, and I've already said my piece about it. The concept of persuasion belongs to rhetoric, not to logi...

I don't like AI art. Let's look at the logical structure of both arguments that figure in the OP: The Christian argument (FTI1) p ? q (FTI2) p (FTI3) ...

Well, there's a hypothesis that says that life started somewhere else. I don't think that's true. But if it is, then no living organism is indigenous ...

Good question. I'm not sure what the answer is.

Here's the thing, Australia doesn't exist according to this fine gentleman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DvaPU-IJvM You're living in a fairy tale.

Stop stealing my , please.

It's a weird thing, isn't it? We take time for granted in our everyday lives, yet when we think about it, it doesn't make sense.

Speaking in general, if you can't prove that God is Jesus Christ, then you're not a Christian philosopher, you're just a philosopher who happens to be...

Well, I can't perceive it. Where is it? If I look at a clock, that's not time itself, that's just an instrument that we use to measure this "thing" th...

Then your quarrel is not with me, it's with Anselm, Aquinas, Descartes, and other philosophers that have offered logical proofs for the existence of G...

When did I say that? Here's my reply to that question: That sounds like nonsense to me, what you just said there. Could you elaborate on that point, s...

Has it occurred to you that math and logic are sciences (or tools, if you prefer) that we use to talk about anything that we want, including apples as...

Because technically speaking, I'm not right. It's an instance of affirming the consequent if we read your example in a charitable way. If we instead r...

Sure. You could probably also read it as: "There is a unique x, such that x is the evening star; there is a unique y, such that y is the morning star,...

That looks ugly as hell.

So when Anselm offers his logical proof for the existence of God, does he want to talk about logic or God, in your view? No, that's a fallacy. Here is...

Is there a specific premise that you're denying, or do I have to do the work for you in that sense?

I'm not seeking to convince anyone of anything. You would do well to assume less about other people, if you believe in Christian virtues as much as yo...

So what does that have to do with the thesis that either Jesus is God or Jesus is not God?

:up:

You don't seem to understand what an argument is. An argument is a list of premises that deductively entail a conclusion. That is exactly what a modus...

Why would I want to show that?

Should this forum allow the use of the N-word then, in your view?

In your new version, you say: Whereas I think that something like the following would work better: P1) God exists. P2) If so, then the act of creation...

Well, it's like the argument's domain of discourse is placing God and the act of creation on equal footing, in the sense that both of them could be in...

I don't understand what you mean here. Can you please elaborate on this point, specifically? I'll just insist on what I said earlier: the truth value ...

Why would I do that?

Thanks :up:

He's the philosopher that has inspired my own philosophy the most.

Yup, nice catch. We could use the uniqueness quantifier ?! (alternatively, ?=1) to make your formula a bit easier on the eyes.

"A" means "causes the act of creation", so "Ag" means "God causes the act of creation". I'm not sure if I should encourage you to keep working on it, ...

The concept of belief is foreign to the formal sciences. Einstein's beliefs about those geometries aren't what makes them suitable for his conceptuali...

Yet Einstein's conceptualization of spacetime is based on the development of non-Euclidean geometries, particularly Riemann's ideas. No, I don't belie...

No one believed in non-Euclidean geometries during the 19th Century, not even their own pioneers. On the contrary, those mathematicians wanted to prov...

I have offered one such proof in the OP of this Thread, and I have done so without even being a Christian philosopher. Sure, it's a rather humble proo...

Speaking in general, the conclusion of one argument can be a premise of a different argument, and vice-versa. Furthermore, there's no need to prove bo...