BlueBanana

Well if we take irreducible particles for example, they do have different properties (and they can be transformed to other particles but that's beside...

Can't find that. From 2) and 3): souls cannot be created (intentional act).

2) Why can't irreducible be designed?

So creation is action, and it's always intentional and planned. Therefor souls can just come to existence (event) but not be intentionally created by ...

What's the difference? Has the universe always existed because it has irreducible parts so it can't have been created? No you don't. Tripping over acc...

Why? One could very well perceive two apples and three apples, notice a difference between them and acquire the understanding of the concept of amount...

So nothing can be created because they contain irreducible parts? I'd like to see you reverse time. And now that you mention it, destroying something ...

By making it not exist. It's not reduced to anything if nothing is left. This is based on what?

All scientific testing involves the use of information discovered by other scientific research. It's theoretically possible to figure out numbers and ...

So you ask what's the difference is between mathematics and morals. The answer is that mathematics can be discovered and proven by scientific testing ...

From what?

Take 5 apples in a bowl, take 5 more, count the apples. You have 10 apples. You make the conclusion that 5+5=10. Kill the person: a person is dead. Ch...

So you mean our sense data in itself is just photons, and doesn't contain the amount? Well it doesn't contain the concept of apples either, but you wo...

Of course we do. Well, technically we see amounts, and derive the concept of numbers from those.

Considering the philosophical zombies, why not?

The socialist countries have higher taxes.

The mirror test tests self-recognition, not consciousness, and even that based solely on the visuality. A robot has been built that passed it, even.

That data contains the amount.

Or you can perceive those amounts in the world and name them, which makes them a posteriori.

Is there not a difference between Paul is God's tool And Paul's agency is God's tool ?

I'm pretty sure it's a fallacy of some sort to answer to a discussion with the premise that God exists with the claim that he doesn't, the claim that ...

Not really what I meant. Other than that in your opinion the God doesn't exist, how can you know Sir2u isn't omnipotent and omniscient?

Yes but one isn't one's agency.

How do you know?

Take two objects. Take three objects. See that there are five objects. That's a posteriori knowledge.

That's not what not being true means. True things are true, even when not proven to be.

Let's sum up the problems in your reasoning: You didn't give a definition for God. God doesn't necessarily create the greatest reality he could. Even ...

Actually, I'm strongly seeing the utilitarianism in your views, but I think you're mistaken in the nature of that theory. Utilitarianism is a theory t...

Ah, you come from the utilitarianist point of view - if you can't convince them, why tell them what you think, right? But of course if you value somet...

Argh, sniped.

Well, there can be other reasons, which would be rather intriguing, but the claim not being proven is the likeliest, isn't it?

Wait - the burden is on those who believe it to be objective.

Hmm... when I imply that he wouldn't care or have any reason to, and you ask me why he would care, how should I answer the question? Also, I don't thi...

This is clear, but the semantics of agnosticism/atheism and who has the burden nof proof are so interesting that we're sticking to those topics on a m...

To get back on the track because I think this point is rather interesting... subjective morals can still have intrinsic value, can't they? And objecti...

No, it's not. It's belief in the lack of something, which does obviously include the lack of belief in that something, but a lack of belief is agnosti...

But that's just agnosticism, not agnostic atheism towards their number being even.

True, but that is someone makes the claim about their number. This is more about social norms and interpreting what's said between the lines than logi...

Yes, there is. For something to be false is the same as it being not true, and the burden of proof being on someone means that their claim is not prov...

Burden of proof is on anyone making any claim. That the Earth couldn't be proven to be round would not be a proof for it being flat, or even not round...

What is there to explain? I don't want him to kill people because it human life has subjective intrinsic value to me and that's my subjective view. He...

And if it's objective it's intrinsic, if it's not it can still be intrinsic. Therefor, the only way to come to the conclusion that nothing is intrinsi...

Why is objective morality needed for moral actions to have intrinsic value? Subjective values can have intrinsic value.

That's argumentum ad ignorantiam.

This all is only true when you start with the premise that morals are subjective. Circular reasoning.

Interesting take. Do you think that whatever question is asked at any moment is the most important question at that moment, or do you at any moment th...

One day I was watching my dog play or do something silly/cute. I can't remember the exact thing she was doing because she's being cute like a gazillio...

So the question was about the existence of a deity and your reasoning is that because you can disprove the existence of the christian God and you're o...

This is honestly probably the first time I hear of referring to classical theism as only theism, as if other beliefs didn't exist as far as philosophy...

Theism means belief in any deity/deities. Monotheism, belief in one deity, often includes properties such as omnipotence, -benevolence, -science, etc....