27 Jul '13 05:07>
Originally posted by menace71Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proved that every system that could be enclosed within a circle depended on something different outside the circle that you have to assume but you can not prove. This means that there are always more things that are true than you can prove and any system of belief, reasoning, and logic requires faith in something unproven.
Too many videos
Give us the gist
Manny
Originally posted by RJHindsWrong.
Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proved that every system that could be enclosed within a circle depended on something different outside the circle that you have to assume but you can not prove. ....
Therefore,.........................................................
Originally posted by RJHindsYou are confusing the map and the territory.
Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proved that every system that could be enclosed within a circle depended on something different outside the circle that you have to assume but you can not prove. This means that there are always more things that are true than you can prove and any system of belief, reasoning, and logic requires faith in something unproven.
...[text shortened]... assumed, but can not be proven.
Just look at the last summary video then.
The Instructor
Originally posted by googlefudgeYes, the universe requires something outside itself and that is what Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proves. Check out the videos, if you don't believe me.
You are confusing the map and the territory.
Even if what you said was true, the fact that we can't KNOW everything about the
universe without assumptions we can't prove, does not mean that the universe
itself requires anything outside of itself.
Our map of reality is not reality itself.
Originally posted by RJHindsWhether this is valid or not, it is not reasonable to use this as justification for believing your particular creation myth.
Yes, the universe requires something outside itself and that is what Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proves. Check out the videos, if you don't believe me.
The Instructor.
Originally posted by PenguinThe creation account in the Holy Bible that I believe has yet to be proven wrong, so I am justified in teaching the truth regardless of your belief in the evilution myth, which has been proven wrong.
Whether this is valid or not, it is not reasonable to use this as justification for believing your particular creation myth.
--- Penguin.
Originally posted by menace71Why not? I've seen cartoons where even more improbable things can happen. So why not a lighting bolt lighting up the inevitably complex eyes of a potentially evolvable polecat squating in a potpourrie of potentially pre-life giving pot of primordial potroast?
I see......That what we see now came from outside of what we see.....information came from outside the system so to speak. What I find funny is we are expected to believe something as complex as DNA just assembled itself. A lighting bolt stuck a puddle and well the rest is history 🙂
Manny
Originally posted by lemon limeLOL me too
Why not? I've seen cartoons where even more improbable things can happen. So why not a lighting bolt lighting up the inevitably complex eyes of a potentially evolvable polecat squating in a potpourrie of potentially pre-life giving pot of primordial potroast?
I have to go now. For some reason talking about evolution at the spirituality board is making me very hungry.
Originally posted by PenguinSpirituality is not exclusive. It it able to take questions and methods of philosophy and science into account, whereas science has relegated itself to being strictly a tool for examining natural phenomenon. It wasn't always this way, but if you ask any atheist he will confirm this is the way it is now... he might even tell you it has always been this way, but then he would be lying or speaking from ignorance.
Whether this is valid or not, it is not reasonable to use this as justification for believing your particular creation myth.
--- Penguin.
Originally posted by lemon limeSo says the expert in speaking from ignorance.
Spirituality is not exclusive. It it able to take questions and methods of philosophy and science into account, whereas science has relegated itself to being strictly a tool for examining natural phenomenon. It wasn't always this way, but if you ask any atheist he will confirm this is the way it is now... he might even tell you it has always been this way, but then he would be lying or speaking from ignorance.