Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9159 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: K.Rose
Post Volume: Total: 915,009 Year: 2,266/9,624 Month: 111/1,588 Week: 40/267 Day: 0/40 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Time and Beginning to Exist
Chuck77
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 51 of 302 (642253)
11-27-2011 1:08 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by designtheorist
11-27-2011 12:58 AM


Re: Reply to PaulK
designtheorist to PaulK writes:
Since the question arises from the discussion of the big bang and the fact it "smacks of divine intervention," you are committing the logical fallacy of begging the question.
Some might say that you are committing the logical fallacy of the appeal to authority with "smacks of divine intervention" in quotation marks obviously referning to Hawking, again.
So committing a logical fallacy in the same sentance you are accusing another member of is not helping. Drop the whole appeal to authority thing you keep bringing into each thread that you have brought here from the get go and begin debating in your own words or no one is going to take you seriously.
I would love to just quote people smarter than me everytime I debate but we're here to debate not to just quote. No one is probably going to really be swayed (save a few) one way or the other so the enjoyment comes from actually debating not trying to convince the other side. Once you understand that it will be easier to stop appealing to authority.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by designtheorist, posted 11-27-2011 12:58 AM designtheorist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by designtheorist, posted 11-27-2011 9:50 AM Chuck77 has not replied
 Message 65 by Larni, posted 11-27-2011 11:29 AM Chuck77 has not replied
 Message 69 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2011 12:50 PM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 241 of 302 (644186)
12-15-2011 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by Straggler
12-15-2011 1:17 PM


Re: Objective/Subjective
*Edited*
Are you guys trying to figure out if math is objective/subjective?
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Straggler, posted 12-15-2011 1:17 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by Straggler, posted 12-16-2011 7:44 AM Chuck77 has replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 243 of 302 (644310)
12-17-2011 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 242 by Straggler
12-16-2011 7:44 AM


Re: Objective/Subjective
Ok. I guess that's the question for a lot of things not just math. Is it a different debate than the one for god(s) or is this one a little more objectivly based? Well, obviously it is more objective but is it along those lines?
It's kind of like the tree in the forest analogy? If no one is around to observe it does math still exist? Or is it soley a human invention?
Would there still be a certain number that describes light years or is it something we came up with to better understand the universe. Or does the universe compel us to use math to try understand things about it. Without math would we be able to figure certain things out or is math a product of our environment.
I'm rambling now. Am I anywhere in the ballpark of what you guys are talking about?
Edited by Chuck77, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by Straggler, posted 12-16-2011 7:44 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Straggler, posted 12-17-2011 8:29 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 245 of 302 (644321)
12-17-2011 7:09 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by Dr Adequate
12-17-2011 6:53 AM


Re: Objective/Subjective
I'd say that we discover math and that mathematical entities don't exist.
So mathematical entities are not realistic if no one discovers them?
We are not discovering things, which exist, but facts, which are true.
So then 2+2=4 is a fact that was never discovered? It didn't exist until someone brought it into existance?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-17-2011 6:53 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-17-2011 7:20 AM Chuck77 has replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


Message 247 of 302 (644326)
12-17-2011 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Dr Adequate
12-17-2011 7:20 AM


Re: Objective/Subjective
Mathematical truths are true, not real, because they're statements, not things.
So 2+2=4 is a concept?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-17-2011 7:20 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-17-2011 7:33 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024