Non-Cognitive statements

[TAJWarren]

When studying religious language in my A-Level course (I am in year 13 - the last year of British high school), my immediate reaction was that I totally questioned the existence of non-cognitive statements. The definition of non-cognitive statements given for this unit is that they are statements for which it is inappropriate to ask whether they are true or false, for they express something other than empirical facts. I could not see how any statement could not be true or false, for example, if I say "I like Star Trek" - surely someone with adequate understanding and equipment could observe my brain functions and conclude that I am having a reaction that shows I enjoy it. What do you think?
I suspect I am being totally oblivious, or just being a total idiot.

[commonsense]

When studying religious language in my A-Level course (I am in year 13 - the last year of British high school), my immediate reaction was that I totally questioned the existence of non-cognitive statements. The definition of non-cognitive statements given for this unit is that they are statements for which it is inappropriate to ask whether they are true or false, for they express something other than empirical facts. I could not see how any statement could not be true or false, for example, if I say "I like Star Trek" - surely someone with adequate understanding and equipment could observe my brain functions and conclude that I am having a reaction that shows I enjoy it. What do you think?
I suspect I am being totally oblivious, or just being a total idiot.

Suppose the statement is, “God exists.”? Do you know of any empirical facts?

[Age]

When studying religious language in my A-Level course (I am in year 13 - the last year of British high school), my immediate reaction was that I totally questioned the existence of non-cognitive statements. The definition of non-cognitive statements given for this unit is that they are statements for which it is inappropriate to ask whether they are true or false, for they express something other than empirical facts. I could not see how any statement could not be true or false, for example, if I say "I like Star Trek" - surely someone with adequate understanding and equipment could observe my brain functions and conclude that I am having a reaction that shows I enjoy it. What do you think?
I suspect I am being totally oblivious, or just being a total idiot.

Although equipment could not tell if you are lying or not, for sure, one with full understanding, however, could be able to tell. So, there are empirical signs which show whether you really do like, and/or enjoy, that show or not.

However, why would you even want to lie, in the beginning?

Also, to me, and only so far, all statements are either true or false, or just a question.

[Age]

When studying religious language in my A-Level course (I am in year 13 - the last year of British high school), my immediate reaction was that I totally questioned the existence of non-cognitive statements. The definition of non-cognitive statements given for this unit is that they are statements for which it is inappropriate to ask whether they are true or false, for they express something other than empirical facts. I could not see how any statement could not be true or false, for example, if I say "I like Star Trek" - surely someone with adequate understanding and equipment could observe my brain functions and conclude that I am having a reaction that shows I enjoy it. What do you think?
I suspect I am being totally oblivious, or just being a total idiot.

Suppose the statement is, “God exists.”? Do you know of any empirical facts?

I do, but this may be off topic in this thread.

But if anyone is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to.

[Walker]

The definition of non-cognitive statements given for this unit is that they are statements for which it is inappropriate to ask whether they are true or false, for they express something other than empirical facts. I could not see how any statement could not be true or false ...

Any statement about the future fits that definition for the unit.

[Impenitent]

at the top of a roller coaster... wheeeee!

but you understood that didn't you?

-Imp

[Walker]

There's also the well-known, non-cognitive Oh My God!, more familiar to some than others.

[Walker]

When studying religious language in my A-Level course (I am in year 13 - the last year of British high school), my immediate reaction was that I totally questioned the existence of non-cognitive statements. The definition of non-cognitive statements given for this unit is that they are statements for which it is inappropriate to ask whether they are true or false, for they express something other than empirical facts. I could not see how any statement could not be true or false, for example, if I say "I like Star Trek" - surely someone with adequate understanding and equipment could observe my brain functions and conclude that I am having a reaction that shows I enjoy it. What do you think?
I suspect I am being totally oblivious, or just being a total idiot.

Suppose the statement is, “God exists.”? Do you know of any empirical facts?

I do, but this may be off topic in this thread.

But if anyone is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to.

Willing is only one branch of Motive's triune. Are you equally ready and Abel? Able to raise Cain from the death of moribund and dusty intellectualizations that have been gnawed on for centuries, so that we may understand?

[Age]

Suppose the statement is, “God exists.”? Do you know of any empirical facts?

I do, but this may be off topic in this thread.

But if anyone is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to.

Willing is only one branch of Motive's triune.

And are all of what is said and claimed about so-called 'motive's triune' irrefutable facts?

Are you equally ready and Abel?

Yes very, very much so.

Able to raise Cain from the death of moribund and dusty intellectualizations that have been gnawed on for centuries, so that we may understand?

Maybe so, we will just have to wait to see what you actually mean and/or are referring to by and with the use of those words.

Until then, as I said I know of empirical facts that God exists, and if any one is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to. As well as also being already prepared, ready, wanting, and able to.

Now, is absolutely any one else here just even somewhat interested in discussing this?

[Walker]

Until then, as I said I know of empirical facts that God exists, and if any one is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to. As well as also being already prepared, ready, wanting, and able to.

Go on ...

[Age]

Until then, as I said I know of empirical facts that God exists, and if any one is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to. As well as also being already prepared, ready, wanting, and able to.

Go on ...

What do you think, imagine, or envision the 'God' word refers to, exactly?

Once this becomes known, through a discussion, then I can proceed further in proving, through a Truly philosophical discussion, how this 'Thing' actually does exist.

[Walker]

Until then, as I said I know of empirical facts that God exists, and if any one is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to. As well as also being already prepared, ready, wanting, and able to.

What are these empirical facts that God exists, that you say you know?

[commonsense]

What do you think, imagine, or envision the 'God' word refers to, exactly?

Once this becomes known, through a discussion, then I can proceed further in proving, through a Truly philosophical discussion, how this 'Thing' actually does exist.

IMO—and I believe also for many people—that thing called God is an omniscient, omnipotent supernatural being.

If you have a different definition, I would certainly like to hear it.

[Age]

Until then, as I said I know of empirical facts that God exists, and if any one is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to. As well as also being already prepared, ready, wanting, and able to.

What are these empirical facts that God exists, that you say you know?

Well seeing as you will not provide your definition of the God word, then this will now have to be a one-way discussion.

One empirical fact that God exists is matter, which is creating, or causing, the Universe in which you have found "yourself" within, and are observing/experiencing.

Another empirical fact that God exists comes from the creations created by and for human beings from having the ability to be Truly OPEN to always be continually never-ending imagining, inventing, designing, planning, and building new, and relatively Truly awe-inspiring, creations.

See, to me and what I found what the God word has been meaning or referring to exactly, the empirical facts are, and were, always 'blindingly obvious', but 'we' human beings had just not evolved enough to be able to see them clearly, nor Accurately. And, in the days when this is being written, 'we' human beings are just on the very brink of this cognitive enlightenment.

But like with absolutely any and all new or more knowledge obviously some reach and obtain comprehension and understanding before others. As it could not be any other way.

[commonsense]

Until then, as I said I know of empirical facts that God exists, and if any one is interested in discussing this, then I am more than willing to. As well as also being already prepared, ready, wanting, and able to.

What are these empirical facts that God exists, that you say you know?

Well seeing as you will not provide your definition of the God word, then this will now have to be a one-way discussion.

One empirical fact that God exists is matter, which is creating, or causing, the Universe in which you have found "yourself" within, and are observing/experiencing.

Another empirical fact that God exists comes from the creations created by and for human beings from having the ability to be Truly OPEN to always be continually never-ending imagining, inventing, designing, planning, and building new, and relatively Truly awe-inspiring, creations.

See, to me and what I found what the God word has been meaning or referring to exactly, the empirical facts are, and were, always 'blindingly obvious', but 'we' human beings had just not evolved enough to be able to see them clearly, nor Accurately. And, in the days when this is being written, 'we' human beings are just on the very brink of this cognitive enlightenment.

But like with absolutely any and all new or more knowledge obviously some reach and obtain comprehension and understanding before others. As it could not be any other way.

Age, as a clarifying question, I would like to know what your criteria for empirical evidence is.