Originally posted by Penguin
It is one demonstration of the fact that there is no evidence for the existence of any particular god and is entirely consistent with there being no god at all, combined with our nature as pattern-seeking animals.
However, it is not an argument to be relied on. Generally speaking, the popularity of an idea has no intrinsic bearing on its truth value.
--- Penguin
Generally speaking, the popularity of an idea has no intrinsic bearing on its truth value.
--- Penguin
Agreed. What then does "an idea" depend on for "its truth value"?
The source authority of the idea?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYou are obsessed with authority.Generally speaking, the popularity of an idea has no intrinsic bearing on its truth value.
--- Penguin
Agreed. What then does "an idea" depend on for "its truth value"?
The source authority of the idea?
The truth of a proposition is not determined by authority.
The truth of a proposition is determined by the accuracy by which it represents reality.
1 edit
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyGooglefudge appears to have read my mind when he says.Generally speaking, the popularity of an idea has no intrinsic bearing on its truth value.
--- Penguin
Agreed. What then does "an idea" depend on for "its truth value"?
The source authority of the idea?
The truth of a proposition is not determined by authority.
The truth of a proposition is determined by the accuracy by which it represents reality.
Penguin.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI love it that you would even ask that question. Absolutely love it.Generally speaking, the popularity of an idea has no intrinsic bearing on its truth value.
--- Penguin
Agreed. What then does "an idea" depend on for "its truth value"?
The source authority of the idea?
Your need for authority is worthy of psychological research I would say.
I wonder how you would act during the Milgram experiment.
Originally posted by googlefudgeWho, then, is the arbiter of " the truth of a proposition" in the event of diametrically opposing points of view? Importantly, what gauge or standard is applied to a "proposition" to determine its accuracy; and who or what defines "reality"?
You are obsessed with authority.
The truth of a proposition is not determined by authority.
The truth of a proposition is determined by the accuracy by which it represents reality.
Originally posted by Great King RatGKR, few months ago you kindly agreed to become my first atheism mentor when we attempted a role play with you as the teacher and me as the student without portfolio. Though the experiment last only a days, I found it beneficial in expanding my awareness of what it must be like walking around in your shoes for a day. Follow on question: does an atheist experience the least hesitation before typing the slang acronym, "OMG"? Is it simply a matter of good taste and style or would that usage be avoided so as not to betray an inner subliminal core acceptance that God exists? What about, "God Damn"?
I love it that you would even ask that question. Absolutely love it.
Your need for authority is worthy of psychological research I would say.
I wonder how you would act during the Milgram experiment.
1 edit
I say God Damn (or its Dutch relative) every now and then, to express a certain feeling. "Oh my God" and "God Damn" and such are expressions. Doesn't make one more or less religious to use them.
Similary, people don't believe it's actually raining cats and dogs when they use that expression.
Of course, I could say "Flying Spaghetti Monster damn me", but that's way too long and besides, I fear I might end up in Pastaferian hell.
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby...... bump for googlefudge
Who, then, is the arbiter of " the truth of a proposition" in the event of diametrically opposing points of view? Importantly, what gauge or standard is applied to a "proposition" to determine its accuracy; and who or what defines "reality"?
Originally posted by Great King RatThanks.
I say God Damn (or its Dutch relative) every now and then, to express a certain feeling. "Oh my God" and "God Damn" and such are expressions. Doesn't make one more or less religious to use them.
Similary, people don't believe it's actually raining cats and dogs when they use that expression.
Of course, I could say "Flying Spaghetti Monster damn me", but that's way too long and besides, I fear I might end up in Pastaferian hell.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyReality is the arbiter of whether or not a proposition is true or not.
Who, then, is the arbiter of " the truth of a proposition" in the event of diametrically opposing points of view? Importantly, what gauge or standard is applied to a "proposition" to determine its accuracy; and who or what defines "reality"?
Science is the mechanism by which we determine the nature of reality.
It is unending search for the truth about the nature of reality.
Whatever that truth may be.
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudgeOriginally posted by googlefudge
You are obsessed with authority.
The truth of a proposition is not determined by authority.
The truth of a proposition is determined by the accuracy by which it represents reality.
"You are obsessed with authority.
The truth of a proposition is not determined by authority.
The truth of a proposition is determined by the accuracy by which it represents reality."
Thread 157761
1 edit
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyOriginally posted by Grampy Bobby
Originally posted by googlefudge
[b]"You are obsessed with authority.
The truth of a proposition is not determined by authority.
The truth of a proposition is determined by the accuracy by which it represents reality."
Thread 157761[/b]
Originally posted by googlefudge
[b]"You are obsessed with authority.
The truth of a proposition is not determined by authority.
The truth of a proposition is determined by the accuracy by which it represents reality."
Thread 157761[/b]
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby"Reality is a collective hunch." -- Lily Tomlin
Who, then, is the arbiter of " the truth of a proposition" in the event of diametrically opposing points of view? Importantly, what gauge or standard is applied to a "proposition" to determine its accuracy; and who or what defines "reality"?
There is more to this than just humor.