Banno

Rubbish. It is at present true that the cat is sitting on my guitar amp. It won't be in a minute or two. There are no false facts. If you think there ...

Yep. @"TheMadFool", the actual world is, after all, possible.

Possible worlds that include contradictions are called impossible worlds. But what is really delightful is that you say both that you care about contr...

Argumentum ab lassitudine? it would be an error to think there is some chance of changing Bart's mind.

(1) reads "there is a possible world in which god exists" SO yes, god exists in some possible world; but that possible world need not be the actual wo...

Good post.There's far more variations than one might suppose. See Varieties of Modality. Modality had a very bad press up until Kripke used possible w...

Fair point.

Indeed; you can't see this. You asked me to show you your thickness. There it is.

By Annabel Crabb Morrison's climate 'plan' reveals a spectacular new model of political leadership in Australia

It's here:

...there's the equivocation, again. You are going to protect your ineptitude regardless of my, or anyone else's, response. That's an inherently, profo...

How does what follow? That you are thick? It follows from your inability to follow a simple argument. But presumably you will not be able to follow th...

again... If it is true, then every proposition is a contingent proposition. Hence, it is not possible that a proposition not be contingent. Hence it i...

again, here's the contradiction:

Nah.

That doesn't seem to follow. If it's all simulations, then there is no need for a material world; every simulation is explained by it's parent simulat...

Meh. Like the turtles, there is no first in an infinite sequence, yet every item has a previous one on which to stand. So I disagree. Your's is the sa...

Of course. No. Contradictions cannot be true, even in paraconsistent logic. This is some weird invention of your own, that mixes Dialetheism with moda...

Unless, like the turtles, it's simulations all the way down...

That looks reasonable at first blush. But folk twist the aspiration into religion.

Then you should have no trouble first showing us what god is and then providing said proof.

AN incoherent notion is perhaps not a description of anything. Of course one can change one's idea of god to fit whatever one likes; but in the end th...

Where did I say anything even approximating this? Well, that's probably true. There's much you haven't understood.

And there you have stepped outside of the uses of "nothing" that we understand and set off up the garden path. Have fun.

You say that like it was a bad thing. Just keeping it real. :wink:

Yeah, it does. It's what's in my pocket. And stuff like that. Philosophy made from ill-chosen metaphors.

How?

In a nutshell, it doesn't rule out enough. Observation is also needed to rule out the unicorns - to choose the actual from the merely possible.

Do we? I've not seen a good argument to that end. What I have seen are theologians struggling with ideas they misplace. For a start, the arguments tre...

I disagree. I think I've shown that it is misleading. That's because it demands more than is needed.

We need PSR to conclude this? I think it evident in every interaction I have. No, evident is the wrong word. It's manifest. The world is comprehensibl...

PSR is relied on by those who insist god is needed to explain all sorts of things. Drop PSR, drop those arguments. I don't see that PSR is needed for ...

We'd have to fill that out. We have: "If I drop two balls at the same time and they fall at the same rate and do this again and again"; what is added ...

Neat.

Seems to me that PSR is needed for Rationalists to do science - Spinoza and Leibniz, and presumably Descartes; but that Rationalism is no longer the b...

Cool. So back to: So where does that leave you? We do not need PSR to do logic and science. Hence we are not committed to the supernatural or creation...

Do we? Isn't it rather that we find that it works rather than assume it? If it didn't, wouldn't we simply adopt a different logic?Of course the world ...

I think I've shown that this is not an assumption of science.

What? I'm not following that.

:rofl: Indeed. You are in the presence of God. I suspect that solipsism is the only conclusion to the conundrum Bart has created. He may eventually re...

How? If material implication is PSR, then

You Ok there?

The article I cited argues that uncertainty is found in classical as well as quantum physics. AN easier version can be found at Has physics ever been ...

I'm not sure what this says. Are you now arguing that while PSR is not needed for logic nor for science, it is needed for god? Then do away with god.

Well, there seems to be nothing that causes an individual electron to veer right or left on egressing a slit. SO there is that. But also, and apart fr...

Again, I am not here to teach you how to read. If god is indeed absolutely omnipotent in the sense you propose, then they cannot be subjected to logic...

Well, let's explore. PSR = everything in this world has a cause and effect Now this clearly falls into the logical category of haunted-universe doctri...

I'm not here to teach you how to read. Geach clearly provides grounds for rejecting your view, along with the other forms of omnipotence. I summarised...

That's it? Hmm. that strikes me as a stretch. It would require that "everything in this world has a cause and effect" is the very same as p?q ? ~p v q...

How do science and logic rely on the Principle of Sufficient Reason? I wold have though it somewhat anachronistic. I've seen no mention of it in studi...