The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Logik » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:05 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:00 am
The idea of a universe that is created by a god is not empirically possible.
The idea of the universe is not empirically possible. Full stop.

Whether it was created by god or pooped out by a unicorn is only further non-empirical speculation.
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:00 am
The universe that is described within the scientific and astronomy community is provable in theory just like the Big Bang Theory which cannot be tested.
1. A theory of "The Universe exists" cannot be tested because it makes no predictions.
2. The "The Big Bang" theory makes predictions and can therefore be tested.

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:51 am
The concept [not idea] of the universe that is described within the scientific and astronomy community is provable in theory just like the Big Bang Theory which cannot be tested.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe
The Big Bang theory can be tested and falsified.
The concept of the universe can neither be tested nor falsified. And it is therefore unscientific.

It is not even wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

surreptitious57
Posts: 2872
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:17 am

LOGIK wrote:
The concept of the universe is unfalsifiable
Because concepts only exist within the mind and therefore cannot be inter subjective and so are not scientific
The existence of the observable Universe can be demonstrated however because that is an actual phenomenon

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Logik » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:18 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:17 am
Because concepts only exist within the mind and therefore cannot be inter subjective and so are not scientific
The existence of the observable Universe can be demonstrated however because that is an actual phenomenon
No. The existence of the universe cannot be demonstrated. Because the concept of The Universe is just a collective noun. It only exists in your head. It means "the set of all things". It means EVERYTHING (including yourself).

So you can observe the CONTENTS of the collective noun. But not the collective noun itself. Because it's just a category in your mind.
The biggest category.

If we are to only concern ourselves with linguistics (like VA) one could hypothetically say that the existence of the universe is empirically falsifiable.

The way to falsify it is by observing a non-existing universe.

surreptitious57
Posts: 2872
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:58 am

LOGIK wrote:
So you can observe the CONTENTS of the collective noun . But not the collective noun itself . Because its just a category in your mind
Is the Universe ALL THAT EXISTS in physical reality or is it simply a concept within my mind ?
I am not a solipsist and physical reality is mind dependent so the Universe exists beyond me
It existed before I was born and will exist after I die so my concept of it is entirely academic

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Logik » Fri Jan 18, 2019 9:07 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:58 am
Is the Universe ALL THAT EXISTS in physical reality or is it simply a concept within my mind ?
That's just more language confusion and mental compartmentalisation.

You get to decide what categories you have in your head.

You can have a box labeled "things that exist in physical reality". Lets call it Box A.
You can have a box labelled "things that exist outside of physical reality". Lets call it Box B.

If so you choose. The boxes aren't the problem. The problem is where do you draw the line between "physical" and "non-physical reality".
How do you decide what goes in Box A and Box B is the problem.

What I mean by "The Universe" is synonymous with the meaning of "All the things that exist".
The Universe is the box that contains all the other boxes. Lets call it box U.

I don't have to have a rule which decides. Because there is only one box. Box U and EVERYTHING goes in it.

The compartmentalisation of your mind is what philosophers call "taxonomy".
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:58 am
I am not a solipsist and physical reality is mind dependent so the Universe exists beyond me
It existed before I was born and will exist after I die so my concept of it is entirely academic
The way I use the word "exists" is in relation to my mind.

Is there a symbol called "universe" in my head. Does it interact with other symbols?

If it doesn't interact or if it has no detectable consequences then the exist/does-not-exists distinction is philosophical.

And none of this really matters in the end, because language is for communication.
If I say God and you understand what I mean - great!
if I say Universe and you understand what I mean - great!

Age
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am

Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:53 am
Is there any thing that you are 100% certain about that you KNOW, for sure, exists?
I am a phenomenologist - I don't dabble into metaphysics.
But before you said: I am logik, and now you are saying: I am a phenomenologist.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
I experience what I experience.
So what?
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
To ask whether it's "real" or it "exists" - such questions do not concern me.
I do NOT care if any thing concerns you or not. I asked you are a yes/no question.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
For I cannot tell the difference between "real" and an "elaborate deception".
Okay.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
The way I use the word "exists" is purely linguistic/logical and for the purposes of symbol manipulation.
So what?
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
If something "exists" then I can qualify/quantify it and put a symbol which represents it on a piece of paper.
So what?

I asked if you KNOW for sure if some thing exists. You did NOT answer that question, but now you state; IF something "exists"... Is it really a sensible thing to state when you can not or do not answer a simple sensible question?
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
I have one apple on my table and 3 apples in my fridge.

1 (apple exists) + 3 (apples exist) = 4.
So what? And,
So what?

So, back to the original question; Are you absolutely certain 100% that you KNOW for sure that those apples exist?
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
If you say The Universe exists. Then I can put a symbol on paper that says. U (for universe).
OK.
Okay.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
And then?
That is NOT a question, although you do add question marks at the end of your statements.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:59 am
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:53 am
If you do, then would you say that exists within the Universe's existence?
Begging the question.
NOT answering the question.

Either you KNOW for sure that some thing exists or you do NOT. IT is NOT that hard a question to answer.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Logik » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:05 am

Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
But before you said: I am logik, and now you are saying: I am a phenomenologist.
Particular vs General distinction.

In general and always - I am Logik.
In this particular context I choose to label myself as a phenomenologist.

This is called "reaching people at the level of their understanding". And the word "phenomenologist" will give you good results on Google.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
So what?
So nothing.

Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
So, back to the original question; Are you absolutely certain 100% that you KNOW for sure that those apples exist?
Suppose the apples don't exist. So what?
The non-existing apples taste great!

Lets raise the stakes. Are you absolutely certain that you exist; or that I exist?

Suppose that we don't exist. So what?

This non-existing me loves eating non-existing apples.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
Either you KNOW for sure that some thing exists or you do NOT.
Yes. I know for sure that any thing either exists or doesn't.
This is called a truism.

I call "everything that either exists or doesn't exist" The Universe.

Age
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:14 am

Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:05 am
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
But before you said: I am logik, and now you are saying: I am a phenomenologist.
Particular vs General distinction.

In general and always - I am Logik.
In this particular context I choose to label myself as a phenomenologist.

This is called "reaching people at the level of their understanding". And the word "phenomenologist" will give you good results on Google.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
So what?
So nothing.

Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
So, back to the original question; Are you absolutely certain 100% that you KNOW for sure that those apples exist?
Suppose the apples don't exist. So what?
The non-existing apples taste great!

Lets raise the stakes. Are you absolutely certain that you exist; or that I exist?

Suppose that we don't exist. So what?

This non-existing me loves eating non-existing apples.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:56 am
Either you KNOW for sure that some thing exists or you do NOT.
Yes. I know for sure that any thing either exists or doesn't.
This is called a truism.

I call "everything that either exists or doesn't exist" The Universe.
Tell me when you have finished editing your post, then I will respond.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Logik » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:18 am

Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:14 am
Tell me when you have finished editing your post, then I will respond.
I don't care if you respond.

You are gauging everything everyone says against the law of non-contradiction. This suggests you are still learning about classical logic and are yet to graduate to meta-logic or constructive logic.

It's boring and tiresome to have to explain everything. Besides - yesterday we agreed that everything you say is wrong.

Age
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 am

Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:18 am
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:14 am
Tell me when you have finished editing your post, then I will respond.
I don't care if you respond.
I do NOT care if you do not care.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:18 am
You are gauging everything everyone says against the law of non-contradiction.
Are you absolutely SURE of this?
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:18 am
This suggests you are still learning about classical logic and are yet to graduate to meta-logic or constructive logic.
Another ASSUMPTION of YOURS.

I asked YOU clarifying questions. YOU do NOT answer them. Either because you are incapable of doing that or do NOT want to.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:18 am
It's boring and tiresome to have to explain everything.
But you have NOT once YET explained any thing new, to Me.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:18 am
Besides - yesterday we agreed that everything you say is wrong.
YOU said that. You decided that on your lonesome.

You also have many other BELIEFS, that you unable to see past.

You are, literally, BLINDED by your OWN making. Through your OWN ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS you are unable to SEE the Truth of things.

I instructed you to do a very simple thing. But even this is just TO HARD for you.

When you inform me that you have finished editing your post, that I was referring to, then I will respond to it.

Logik
Posts: 4048
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Logik » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 am

Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 am
YOU said that. You decided that on your lonesome.
You gave me permission to decide for you. So I did.

And since I am deciding stuff...

I am absolutely 100% certain that you are now on my ignore list.

Age
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:55 am

Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 am
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 am
YOU said that. You decided that on your lonesome.
You gave me permission to decide for you. So I did.
Surely you can NOT be this STUPID.

I NEVER gave you permission to decide for me.

This is what I said:
First learn and decide the definition of the words you want to use, then the rest falls into place.

Your replied:
That's not useful. Words define other words which define other words.
Is there any word that is True and Correct without the need for it to be defined by other words?


(Besides the actual FACT that there are many upon many words that are True and Correct without the need for them to be defined by other words, you, once again, have jumped straight to some completely WRONG conclusion from your OWN completely made up WRONG assumption.)

I then replied:
As I suggested; That is up to you to learn and decide.

You then asked the question:
So I get to decide what's "True and Correct" ?

I then said:
That is completely up to you, to learn and decide

You then made up your OWN assumption AND conclusion and so wrote:
OK! Thank you for the permission to make decisions for you.

How you could be so STUPID to come to such a ridiculous conclusion could only be the result of a person so utterly BLINDED by their OWN BELIEFS.

The obvious FACT here, is that I NEVER gave you permission to make decisions for me. This can be easily evidenced by WHAT IS WRITTEN. You have just, once again, jumped to that conclusion solely because of the absolutely distorted views that you have, which are, by the way, based solely upon your OWN past experiences.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 am
And since I am deciding stuff...
If you really are this unaware, you WERE deciding stuff long before now.
Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:29 am
I am absolutely 100% certain that you are now on my ignore list.
Okay.

Age
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:02 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:00 am

The idea of a universe that is created by a god is not empirically possible.
That sounds like an absolute.

Age
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:04 pm

Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:05 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:00 am
The idea of a universe that is created by a god is not empirically possible.
The idea of the universe is not empirically possible. Full stop.
This sounds like another absolute.

Age
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The greatest imaginable is much less than the greatest possible -- Anselm fails

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:07 pm

Logik wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:18 am

So you can observe the CONTENTS of the collective noun. But not the collective noun itself. Because it's just a category in your mind.
The biggest category.
One does NOT have to observe ALL of some thing to KNOW that It [something literally] exists.

The one called logik put out a challenge, but when they were being SHOWN that their BELIEFS were WRONG, they decided to ignore this and thus NOT to communicate anymore.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests