Logic?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
2,160
Hi everyone - I'm a "newbie" with something to say.

It seems that the original point of the discussion has been lost - in fact, it never really got "off the ground" (so to speak) - it quickly degraded into a silly contest of insults.
The reason for discussing something is to gain insight/understanding - it is (should) not be to determine the winner of an argument.

Humans crave understanding - we want to know the truth - we want to know things like when?/where?/what?/how?/why?/.........
We question so as to learn/understand - we discuss so as to learn/understand.
We use "logic".
But "logic" is not always logical - there be paradoxes - sometimes "logic" is flawed - something that might seem to be logical is in fact not logical.

Any/everything that a human experiences via their senses is an abstraction of reality.
Consider that photons that strike the retina are converted to an image by the mind - that what you actually/physically "see" is purely an abstraction of reality - your mind makes it make sense.
FYI: The lens of the eye focuses the incoming light and (anatomically) inverts that light - what you actually/physically "see" is in fact an upside-down image that is inverted by the mind - your mind makes what you see make sense.

Consider "logic".
There is no such thing is "pure/concrete logic" - "logic" is a further (higher-order) abstraction - it's what your mind "thinks" makes sense so as to make sense.

Consider the probability that life originated spontaneously (by nothing other than chance).
Seriously?
Life must have been created - no other explanation makes sense.
How can anyone possibly entertain the "Theory of Evolution" (ideology of evolution) when probability emphatically "says" otherwise.

Consider Atheism.
Atheists believe there is no God, and consider those that believe in God as being intellectually inferior.
An Atheist thinks that God is imaginary - something that stupid people use to get by.
An Atheist thinks that the inability to prove the existence of God somehow proves that there is no God - that it is somehow "logical".
Atheists think that they are not "religious" in that they do not believe in God.
However - Atheism is by definition a "religion" in that it is a faith statement - it is purely a belief - they believe God does not exist, but cannot prove it.

An Atheist is "drawn" to the ideology of Evolution in that it satisfies his/her mind - their minds want it (Evolution) to make sense.
But what about the improbability (impossibility) of life originating spontaneously - it cannot be ignored.

Neither the existence nor the non-existence of God can be proven.
Probability strongly suggests that life was created, and did not originate spontaneously.
Believe what you want.
 

Sinbad

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Messages
66,400
Probability scientists everywhere think you're intellectually inferior.
 

Ninja'd

A Djinn
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
46,207
When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful
A miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical
And all the birds in the trees, well they'd be singing so happily
Oh joyfully, playfully watching me
But then they send me away to teach me how to be sensible
Logical, oh responsible, practical
And they showed me a world where I could be so dependable
Oh clinical, oh intellectual, cynical
 

EADC

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
4,449
When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful
A miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical
And all the birds in the trees, well they'd be singing so happily
Oh joyfully, playfully watching me
But then they send me away to teach me how to be sensible
Logical, oh responsible, practical
And they showed me a world where I could be so dependable
Oh clinical, oh intellectual, cynical
.images%20(3).jpeg
 

Frequent visitor

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2018
Messages
2,809
Hi everyone - I'm a "newbie" with something to say.

It seems that the original point of the discussion has been lost - in fact, it never really got "off the ground" (so to speak) - it quickly degraded into a silly contest of insults.
The reason for discussing something is to gain insight/understanding - it is (should) not be to determine the winner of an argument.

Consider the probability that life originated spontaneously (by nothing other than chance).
Seriously?
Life must have been created - no other explanation makes sense.
How can anyone possibly entertain the "Theory of Evolution" (ideology of evolution) when probability emphatically "says" otherwise.
I am in sympathy with your first point above. My advice, for what it is worth, is to ignore those who are just being nasty. There are plenty of sensible people on this forum with reasoned viewpoints.

Evolution is not inconsistent with creation theory to my mind. The point of difficulty comes when evolutionists insist that this is the only mechanism involved, or when creationists insist that only that mechanism explains everything.

What would constitute creation is not so simple as you make out. For example would creating conditions in which life could evolve count as creation?

I have no difficulty in accepting that life does evolve as time goes by. But accepting that life evolved by chance in the first place is something else. Likewise your assertion that life MUST have been created - because no other explanation makes sense - is a bit dogmatic for my taste. That is an assertion, not a discussion!

Anyway, welcome to the forum. Enjoy it for what it provides.
 

I.am.Sam

rehabilitated troller
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Messages
82,350
When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful
A miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical
And all the birds in the trees, well they'd be singing so happily
Oh joyfully, playfully watching me
But then they send me away to teach me how to be sensible
Logical, oh responsible, practical
And they showed me a world where I could be so dependable
Oh clinical, oh intellectual, cynical
I sang that ...
 

Nerfherder

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
24,563
When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful
A miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical
And all the birds in the trees, well they'd be singing so happily
Oh joyfully, playfully watching me
But then they send me away to teach me how to be sensible
Logical, oh responsible, practical
And they showed me a world where I could be so dependable
Oh clinical, oh intellectual, cynical
Who I am, who I aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
 

beans100

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
10,680
Logika? Kom ek verduidelik.....het jy 'n vis tenk by die huis ......
 

Colin62

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
7,995
Knowing what you do, is it logical to assume that you won’t be surprised that no one has taken your thread seriously?
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
56,180
Believe what you want.
I'll do that, thanks.

But in all seriousness, I'd happily engage with you a bit in respect of some misunderstandings RE atheism and evolution I see in your post (from my own personal perspective).

Let's see if you come back to the thread. :)
 

Ponderer

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
2,160
The original point of the discussion is the improbability of the spontaneous origin of life, and how that is ignored.
It logically follows that the "Theory of Evolution" therefore cannot be entertained as a plausible explanation for the existence of life.
It seems that people don't like to face facts - that a good story should not be spoiled with facts.

Believe what you want, but don't confuse belief with logic/facts.
 

copacetic

King of the Hippies
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
56,180
The original point of the discussion is the improbability of the spontaneous origin of life, and how that is ignored.
I think I missed whatever the original discussion is, to which you refer, but in any event - Is it ignored, or are you saying it is ignored in the sense that any potential explanations that might damage your logical step are glossed over by yourself, rather than properly investigated and discussed?
It logically follows that the "Theory of Evolution" therefore cannot be entertained as a plausible explanation for the existence of life.
Well, it's a plausible explanation for the current life forms that exist, as well as what we see in the historical record. Obviously, the further back we go, the less certainty there can be on the details, but there's very little to quibble about in relation to the basic processes at work.

Also, whether life initially sparked from a methane soup by chance, was crafted by God themselves (which god? Aliens? Jesus? Zeus?) or that we are actually players in a computer simulation - Can we tell, and does it matter?
It seems that people don't like to face facts - that a good story should not be spoiled with facts.
Facts are just the best, but stating something as fact, doesn't make it so, which I'm sure you'd agree with, and you've stated a lot of what look and sound like facts, but lack the substance to earn the title.
Believe what you want, but don't confuse belief with logic/facts.
I don't, as best as I can. Are you sure you can say the same?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top