Go Back   Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums > General Discussion > Critical Thinking
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2006, 11:48 PM   #1
MalReynolds
CHOCK FULL O' NUTRIENTS
FFR Veteran
 
MalReynolds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: A Denny's Bathroom.
Age: 33
Posts: 6,571
Send a message via AIM to MalReynolds
Default God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

http://forums.livingwithstyle.com/sh...98&postcount=1

"INTRODUCTION

Let me say at the outset that this in no way proves the existence of the Christian God versus the Jewish God versus the Islamic God versus the God of Armchair Intellectuals or what-have-you. But it does indeed prove the existence of some God — some Supreme Being — so long as you accept its two premises.

To be valid, a logical argument must proceed in perfect accordance with the rules of its system. Its inferences (including its conclusion) must follow from one another, and its statements must be wiffs (well formed formulas). Any argument, even a circular argument, is valid in this respect even if its premises are false.

But to be sound, a logical argument must be valid AND all its premises must be true. If an argument is sound, then its conclusion is incontrovertible. Whatever contradicts the conclusion of a sound argument is definitively false. There is no question, no controversy even from atheist philosophers that this argument is valid. The question is whether it is sound. In order to show that it is not sound, you must show that one or more of its premises is false.

Arguing about definitions is pointless. The definition of God will be coherent. Arguing about the rules of logic is pointless. The rules are the standard rules of S5 modal logic, and assume a Euclidean relation among worlds. And arguing about the fallacies of Anselm's ontological argument is pointless. Although this argument is initially based on his, it is not his, and arguing against his is a straw man.

S5 MODAL LOGIC

For those not familiar with modal logic, a modal is a kind of truth. Specifically for S5, there are three modals: (1) necessity, (2) possibility, and (3) actuality.

If a statement is true in all possible worlds, then it is necessarily true. Necessity is indicated by this symbol: [] — two square brackets. (That's the ASCII rendering of a block.) If a statement is true in at least one world, then it is possibly true. Possibility is indicated by this symbol: <> — two angle brackets. (The ASCII rendering of a diamond.) Finally, if a statement is true in the actual world, then it is actually true. Actual truth is indicated predicatively — i.e., without any sign. Thus:

[]A — A is necessarily true. A cannot possibly be false. A is always true in all worlds.

<>A — A is possibly true. A can be true in one world but false in another.

A — A is true in the actual world. It may or may not be true in some other world.

POSSIBLE WORLD SEMANTICS

Strictly speaking, a world is a set of statements. The set of true statements that describes the world we live in is called the "actual world". A set of true statements describing either the actual world or some world other than the world we live in is a possible world. A set of true statements describing every possible world is a necessary world. Note that the actual world is a possible world, but a possible world is not necessarily the actual world.

For example, the statement that a circle's circumference is a ratio of pi to its diameter describes a possible world, but not the actual world and not a necessary world. The statement is true only in a world of flat planes. The actual world is a world of curved space, and while pi can approximate the ratio sufficiently for nearly every conceivable purpose, circles in the actual world conform to non-Euclidean geometries. Therefore, since the actual world is a possible world, and the statement is not true in the actual world, the statement does not describe a necessary world.

A world in which no statements are true is not a possible world. It cannot exist.

Because the modals of S5 are Euclidean, the accessibility condition between necessity and possibility is as follows: (wRv AND wRu) -> vRu, where "w" is a world, "R" is a relation, and "v" and "u" are truth bearers (statements that are either true or false). Therefore, necessity and possibility can be derived from one another. In fact their derivation is intuitive:

[]A <-> ~<>~ A If it is necessary that A is true, then it is not possible that A is not true.

<>A <-> ~[]~A If it is possible that A is true, then it is not necessary that A is not true.

See Stanford University's page on modal logic for a more in-depth introduction.

DEFINITION OF GOD

The term "God" is commonly accepted to mean Supreme Being. (Warning: Dictionary.com sometimes has a popup.) It so happens that S5 modal logic provides a convenient way, via the modal of necessity, to render the term "Supreme Being" into logical symbology. If we accept that supreme is a superlative, then it follows that there can be only one being that is supreme.

To convince ourselves that this is true, we can construct an argument ad reductio. Suppose for the sake of argument that it were possible for a being to be supreme but not necessary. And suppose that it were possible for a being to be necessary but not supreme. Since a necessary being must (by definition) exist in all possible worlds, then that would mean that there is at least one world in which there exists a being that is supreme but NOT necessary. Thus, he is not supreme at all, because there is a necessary being in his world. Since we've reached a contradiction, the reductio premise must be false. There is one and only one Supreme Being.

So we may use "necessary" as the logical equivalent of "supreme". And we may use "existence" as the ontological equivalent of "being". (See the definition of existence.) A being that is necessary exists in all possible worlds, and thus is supreme. For our logical tableau, we will refer to God as that which exists necessarily, or Necessary Existence (NE).

It can be shown that Necessary Existence is true in S5, and that the S5 Axiom is itself true. We are now sufficiently armed to write up our proof.

PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS IN ACTUALITY

Given []G = NE, prove G

1. <>G Premise

2. [](G -> []G) Premise

3. <>[]G The Kripke Principle ([](<>A AND ([](A -> B)) -> <>B) applied to 1, 2

4. <>[]G -> []G The S5 Axiom

5. []G Modus Ponens on 3, 4

6. []G -> G Necessary existence is true in S5

7. G Modus Ponens on 5, 6

QED

(Plain English Translation)

1. It is possible that God exists.

2. Necessarily, if God actually exists, then He exists necessarily

3. Therefore, it is possibly necessary that God exists (because it's necessary that if it's possible that A is true, and it is necessary that A implies B, then it is possible that B is true)

4. If it is possibly necessary that God exists, then it is necessary that God exists (otherwise the frame would not be Euclidean)

5. Therefore, it is necessary that God exists (because it is possible that He does)

6. If it is necessary that God exists, then God exists in actuality (otherwise the system would not be S5)

7. Therefore, God actually exists (because it is necessary that He does)

POINTS FOR DISCUSSION/DEBATE

As stated in the introduction, there can be no reasonable controversy over any part of the proof other than (1) and (2) — the premises. Let's examine those.

Premise 1 — <>G It is possible that God exists

To negate either the modal (<>) or the term (G) would be a semantic disaster because of the coherent definition of God. ~<>G would mean "it is not possible that a being that exists in all possible worlds exists", and <>~G would mean "it is possible that a being that exists in all possible worlds does not exist". But how can this be? It would be like saying that it is not possible that a bachelor is unmarried. Or that it is possible that a red car is not red.

Premise 2 — [](G -> []G) Necessarily, if God actually exists, then He exists necessarily

Surely this is not controversial. If the actuality of a thing implies the necessity of it, then the implication must itself be necessary. Otherwise, the actual world would be the only possible world, and there could be no true statements in any abstract symbological system. In other words, logic itself (and math itself) would be untrustworthy, since there would be the possibility of false statements."

I really don't have much else to add to that. I'm sure a few higher-level thinkers on here should have no problem tearing it apart, and look forward to it
__________________
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."

"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor


My new novel:

Maledictions: The Offering.

Now in Paperback!
MalReynolds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2006, 11:56 PM   #2
xDdRmAnIaCx
FFR Player
 
xDdRmAnIaCx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 291
Send a message via AIM to xDdRmAnIaCx Send a message via MSN to xDdRmAnIaCx
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

That is some crazy stuff.

If only I could understand S5 modual logic.
__________________

xDdRmAnIaCx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 10:40 AM   #3
Neonatrias
MAЯISA
FFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
Neonatrias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Urbana, IL
Age: 33
Posts: 919
Send a message via AIM to Neonatrias Send a message via Yahoo to Neonatrias Send a message via Skype™ to Neonatrias
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

The only thing that makes this questionable is the premise that there is a necessity for God to exist. Aside from that...Man, that's a trip. Kudos to the author.
Neonatrias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 01:23 PM   #4
Reach
FFR Simfile Author
Sectional ModeratorFFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
Reach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Age: 33
Posts: 7,462
Send a message via AIM to Reach Send a message via MSN to Reach
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

This does in no way 'prove' the existence of a god. Anyone who thinks they can do so is clearly delusional or is ignorant to how proof of knowledge is actually obtained.

This is only assumption built on assumption, thus it is only valid within itself. There is absolutely no proof here. The foundation rests on the fact that it is possible for god to exist, which is an assumption. You can say anything is possible. You are not proving anything here because you are assuming that it is possible because there is no way to prove if it is possible in the first place.
__________________
Reach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 01:39 PM   #5
MalReynolds
CHOCK FULL O' NUTRIENTS
FFR Veteran
 
MalReynolds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: A Denny's Bathroom.
Age: 33
Posts: 6,571
Send a message via AIM to MalReynolds
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

I think the same arguement is going on in the thread I found this, and the guy is doing a hell of a job defending himself. Lemme see if I can drudge up a summary of his points.
__________________
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."

"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor


My new novel:

Maledictions: The Offering.

Now in Paperback!
MalReynolds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 02:19 PM   #6
Reach
FFR Simfile Author
Sectional ModeratorFFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
Reach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Age: 33
Posts: 7,462
Send a message via AIM to Reach Send a message via MSN to Reach
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

It's impossible to argue that...there is no evidence within this article. It falls through on the basis that is it impossible to prove if god is possible or not. You cannot. If you think you can you are mistaken.

I will also copy and paste something I said to banditcom


"not to mention he really needs to take his ass out of his philosophy class. I hate people that write like that. It reminds me of like, Chris langdan, some guy with a like 195 IQ or something, that noone listens to because he keeps spewing on using language noone understands. I think that's why einstein is so famous. He had his head out of his ass. People understood what he was talking about because he explained it clearly. I think they write like this purposly to cover up their assumptions and fallacies. "
__________________

Last edited by Reach; 03-30-2006 at 02:34 PM..
Reach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 02:45 PM   #7
banditcom
FFR Player
 
banditcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Willimantic, CT
Age: 37
Posts: 6,243
Send a message via ICQ to banditcom Send a message via AIM to banditcom Send a message via Yahoo to banditcom Send a message via Skype™ to banditcom
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Reach said exactly what I was going to say: it's all based on assumption. Something like this, you can't prove based on assumptions. There are certain things you can prove starting from an assumption, and there are certain things you can't prove, as there is no basis for it. I've taken discrete structures and linear algebra classes, which are heavily involved in assumptions (especially the former).

All this guy is doing is throwing out big words with philosophical-type talking to try to prove his point and cover up the fact that one cannot prove something from that type of assumption. He tries to use logic-based formulas, yet fails to use logic himself.
banditcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 03:29 PM   #8
nforcer06164
FFR Player
FFR Veteran
 
nforcer06164's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Champaign, IL
Age: 32
Posts: 4,772
Send a message via AIM to nforcer06164 Send a message via Skype™ to nforcer06164
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Funny thing is, my English class has been going over logic and processes and fallacies and such. I found this today and printed it out, and gave it to my English teacher (a logical genius) for review while we took an inductive fallacy test. Apparently, he's already found some holes, and wants to break out the red and discuss it with me tomorrow. If anything he says is worth noting in disproving any of the logic or theory presented, I'll be sure to pass it on here within the next few days.
__________________

PROUD OWNER OF TWO OMEGA FAVORS. YEAH, NICE TRY.
Giant NES Controller (4 FEET) progress: PAINT IS DONE!
Download my Wii Music Suite v1.0, and PM me with your input!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeek
My mind says "GOGOGOG" and my hands go "wut no scru u ***"
nforcer06164 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 03:29 PM   #9
xObserveRx
FFR Simfile Author
FFR Simfile Author
 
xObserveRx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ontario
Age: 38
Posts: 1,150
Send a message via AIM to xObserveRx Send a message via MSN to xObserveRx
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Also, regardless of whether or not this is considered a valid argument, it's not like if this guy was right or wrong. None of those god believing people are gonna suddenly go, "holy ****, this guy's right! Screw the church, i'm out of here!"


...
__________________
Come Play The Werewolf Game!
xObserveRx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 03:42 PM   #10
talisman
Resident Penguin
FFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
talisman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Age: 34
Posts: 4,598
Send a message via AIM to talisman
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

It's step 4 that's wrong. Now I don't know much about Euclidean frames, but going from possible to definitely is a contradiction in terms.
talisman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 03:54 PM   #11
Benny1
FFR Player
 
Benny1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The time was prophesied that will approach surely.
Age: 29
Posts: 1,147
Send a message via AIM to Benny1
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Is god even logical?
Is this supreme creator of ours even a logical idea?

How can we apply logic to something that can do things that are illogical/impossible?

If god could be proved like this, we would have proved it a long time ago.
__________________
Benny1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 04:52 PM   #12
Afrobean
Admiral in the Red Army
FFR Veteran
 
Afrobean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: the moon
Age: 32
Posts: 13,262
Send a message via Skype™ to Afrobean
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Haha!

This reminds me of that guy that came in here insulting all of us. Using excessive vocabulary and explaining things in terms that people who need them explained to wouldn't understand anyway.

Either way, debating existance of any god has always been known to be impossible. Using logic to prove existence is impossible, since faith is generally defined as ignoring the logical world in favor of a supernatural one. How can one argue that there is another wordly being using only happenings of this world? It's not possible.

It's like I was saying to a friend in class the other day. He said that if someone was to see God, they would die. He, of course, is one of those people who literally believe stories of the bible. Anyway, I said to him that God (assuming he is "real"-I use quotes because real is relative and existence in another plane doesn't mean existance in any other reality) can't be seen by anyone ever simply because he is not of this world.

In short: religion is pointless to argue about or try to prove because it's basic principle is ignoring the logical world, and the logical world is the only way to argue or prove anything.
__________________
Afrobean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 04:54 PM   #13
mattyohh
FFR Player
 
mattyohh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: 90 Paces West
Age: 30
Posts: 349
Send a message via MSN to mattyohh
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

If you think about it how can something of been around forever before time itself started and everywhere at once. if i was god i'd show myself and meet some cool people and hang with them. the only the you can prove indefinably that god exists is if appears to everyone at once and says the same thing. And even then it'd still be up for debate
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by FishFishRevolution
You are banned from the Garbage Bin until January 1st, 2007. Don't worry, I usually let people out of their sentences early if they have good behavior. You are still able to view the Garbage Bin, but if you post there, I will physically site-wide ban you until further notice.

Reason: Insulting Dragonforce aka my religion. Also being a general GB noob.

-Fish
lol
mattyohh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 05:19 PM   #14
-Izzy-
Banned
FFR Simfile Author
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,629
Send a message via AIM to -Izzy-
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

On a completley unrelated matter i was talking with this girl from my school about time. Is time really thing that exists or is just something that is an artificial mesurement. I dont think there is really a physical time that we can go back in. So if things always were maybe god wouldnt have had to be before time. But who knows. That same concept would apply to we could have just always been.
-Izzy- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 05:21 PM   #15
Moogy
嗚呼
FFR Simfile Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: 車輪の国
Age: 31
Posts: 10,306
Send a message via AIM to Moogy
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

livingwithstyle.com

stopped reading there
__________________
Plz visit my blog
Moogy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 05:29 PM   #16
aperson
FFR Hall of Fame
Retired StaffFFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
aperson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,298
Send a message via AIM to aperson
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Quote:
Originally Posted by talisman
It's step 4 that's wrong. Now I don't know much about Euclidean frames, but going from possible to definitely is a contradiction in terms.

Absolutely. I've never ever seen any kind of logic argument take that step before.

Also, by his logic, you can simply use induction to say that since anything you think might exist has to exist, everything exiists. In essence, we're in infinity.
__________________
aperson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 05:46 PM   #17
Reach
FFR Simfile Author
Sectional ModeratorFFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
Reach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Age: 33
Posts: 7,462
Send a message via AIM to Reach Send a message via MSN to Reach
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aperson
Absolutely. I've never ever seen any kind of logic argument take that step before.

Also, by his logic, you can simply use induction to say that since anything you think might exist has to exist, everything exiists. In essence, we're in infinity.
exactly

Izzy, our understanding of time is fairly primative, but we know it's relative, suggesting that there is probably no time line. It is likely time is nothing more than events happening within our 3 dimensional perception of space-time.
__________________
Reach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 05:46 PM   #18
GuidoHunter
is against custom titles
FFR Veteran
 
GuidoHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Texas
Age: 36
Posts: 7,379
Send a message via AIM to GuidoHunter Send a message via Skype™ to GuidoHunter
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Izzy-
Is time really thing that exists or is just something that is an artificial mesurement.
No, because time is relative. Since my time is different from your time, there is no absolute time.

Time also doesn't exist for photons and other things that move at the speed of light.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Afrobean
faith is generally defined as ignoring the logical world in favor of a supernatural one
Faith doesn't ignore anything logical. Perfectly fine logical arguments can be used in matters of faith. Faith deals with scientific constructs: things that cannot be proven.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandiagod View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandiagod View Post
She has an asshole, in other pics you can see a diaper taped to her dead twin's back.
Sentences I thought I never would have to type.
GuidoHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 05:50 PM   #19
PMS-Izzy
FFR Player
 
PMS-Izzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 21
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

It would definatly be easier to have faith in something that makes sense though and maybe something that can eventually be proven.

If god told me to be faithful i probably would. So far nothing has happened though.
__________________
Proud member of the Posting One Million squad.
1 MIL GET PMS-Izzy
8,000 Got
26,000 Got.
PMS-Izzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2006, 06:27 PM   #20
GuidoHunter
is against custom titles
FFR Veteran
 
GuidoHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Texas
Age: 36
Posts: 7,379
Send a message via AIM to GuidoHunter Send a message via Skype™ to GuidoHunter
Default Re: God Exists? Interesting essay I found.

If it could be proven, it wouldn't be faith. A construct is not something that hasn't been proven, it's something that CANNOT be proven.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandiagod View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandiagod View Post
She has an asshole, in other pics you can see a diaper taped to her dead twin's back.
Sentences I thought I never would have to type.
GuidoHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution