Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2005 5:40 pm
Interesting.
Specifically, which parts did you take issue with?
Specifically, which parts did you take issue with?
Actually the article did address that briefly. But otherwise I pretty much agree that atheist prostelytizing is the same as theist prostelyting. Basically they take as an apriori truth that pure reason is the only legitimate way to conduct one's life and try to tell others to live the same way.cxt wrote: And various Christians doctrines answer that questions in a number of ways--all of which are ignored by the article.
You cannot use logic as a system for determining absolute truth. You can only use it to determine the truth value of statement within a logical framework. What bothers me about atheist proselytizing is that it is ultimately hypocritical. You can't accept Godel's Incompleteness Theorem and in the same breath condemn others for adopting a system on faith.-Metablade- wrote:I would argue that logic and reason stand apart from a persons adherence to it's truths.
Physical laws are called laws for a reason, and they do not require belief in order for them to:
Meta: So, I gather that your position for determining absolute truth is to instead of using critical thinking and logic, to use, perhaps *illogic*, faith, belief, good intentions and perhaps a little fairy dust thrown in for good measure?Valkenar wrote: You cannot use logic as a system for determining absolute truth.
Meta: Right, and the logical framework is the world we live in.Valkenar wrote: You can only use it to determine the truth value of statement within a logical framework.
Meta:Valkenar wrote: What bothers me about atheist proselytizing is that it is ultimately hypocritical.
Meta:Valkenar wrote: You can't accept Godel's Incompleteness Theorem and in the same breath condemn others for adopting a system on faith.
Not at all, I use logical and critical thinking, I just accept that I have no basis but faith for doing so. And I have to take accept this, because I have to either discover a way to refute Godel, or only selectively apply logic. I'm not smart enough to refute godel, and selectively applying logic undermines the whole point of champining logic and rationality as a desirable process.Meta: So, I gather that your position for determining absolute truth is to instead of using critical thinking and logic, to use, perhaps *illogic*, faith, belief, good intentions and perhaps a little fairy dust thrown in for good measure?
How do you know that? How do you know that logic the true nature of the universe?I would submit to you, that logic and critical thinking are all that we truly have in this world to aid in determining the *absolute truth*.
...
Meta: Right, and the logical framework is the world we live in.
The world of reality.
Godel says:Show me evidence of anything other than the reality of the world we live in, and I'll change my paradigm.
Therefore logic proves itself to be either inconsistent or incomplete. Maybe I'm just badly misusing it, but by my understanding, this is one of the implications.For any consistent formal theory including basic arithmetical truths, it is possible to construct an arithmetical statement that is true but not included in the theory. That is, any consistent theory of a certain expressive strength is incomplete.
For any formal theory T including basic arithmetical truths and also certain truths about formal provability, T includes a statement of its own consistency if and only if T is inconsistent.
Just a couple fun facts. I am an atheist and a fairly strict materialist. I do not believe in any sort of supernatural phenomena, and practice no spiritualism.Is that what you think "atheism" is?
Another religion which is contrary to yours?
If so, you might want to read up on it little more.
It may not be what you think it is.
You don't? I'm honestly intrigued to know why. If you're a die-hard advocate of critical thinking and rational analysis, what options are there beyond refuting or accepting it? I wouldn't imagine you'd just dismiss it out of hand.I never claimed to accept Godel's Incompleteness Theorem