rational dawn hires hitman, deserves refund (part 1, probably)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5yow242IGw

1st premise of the forbidden argument:

If "God" refers to nothing, then "God doesn't exist" is true.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• jericomovie
• dilettante
• veritas48
• dawahfilms
• telemantros
• rational
• dawn
• forbidden
• argument

[SetonsH4ll]

You were equally if not more-so condescending and fascicle to vertias48 for significantly less warranted reasons.

[urbanelf]

It was sarcasm, not condescension.

[telemantros]

If a premise must contain an 'if then' clause, then the majority of philosophers are wrong ... and dumb.

[urbanelf]

Maybe I said it wrong... Jericomovie told me, in public communication, that a premise MAY NOT contain an if-then. The conclusion is still equally bizarre, no?

[SonofTzeentch]

Urbanelf, will you be putting up a revised version of your second forbidden argument?

[urbanelf]

Yes sir.

I had good feedback from FatGermanBastard and VeryEvilPettingZoo(good in that they pointed out a huge problem). I've been discussing it with friends and I think I've worked it out.

Thanks for the interest.

[TheTruePooka]

Heh heh, Oh man. I should unsub from you just for the pleasure of subing to you again.

I'm going to be a helpful Pooka and point out to this Jericho fellow in case he catches it;

That last 30 seconds or so; in Metaphysics... we call that;

"Slightly snarky, deadpan sarcasm".

Can't wait for his response! This should be positively fun.

[cowboycoco]

what a dumb counter. Ignoring his "your premises aren't premises" attack, he argues that "god" won't refer to nothing, but rather something that doesn't exist. WTF!?! How does this defeat the argument at all. RD hired a hitman to take out urbanelf but his aim was bad and he took out god instead.

[SerasXHarkonnen]

You seem like a smart guy and are arguing against the existence of god... there seems to be a trend there.

[Censeo]

What I mean is. If unicorn means both magical horse like creatures with some horn on their forehead AND worms in the ass, that just means that neither of these two are unicorns, but both of them could exist.

[Censeo]

Well, even if god doesn't exist, your argument doesn't prove that an intelligent agent didn't give rise to the universe and that a virgin held a son to be sacrificed on a cross 2.000 years ago. So what is the point of the argument?

[Dhorpatan]

@SetonsH4ll

God doesn't exist. Be thankful you are not beholden to a totalitarian dictator that can make reality conform to it's wishes. This would subvert the uniformity of nature.

[Dhorpatan]

Condescendingly pedagogical? I think this is the first video I've heard someone use the word pedagogical.

[kaminarigaston]

As you see the conclusion can't be right because Martians can't be Earthlings as defined. The problem is that definitions are always truth as definitions but to be truth as facts they must apply to something that actually exists.

So this:

1.Martians are living entities that were born and live in Mars.

Should be stated as:

1.If Martians existed, they would be living entities that were born and live in Mars.

Unless you limit yourself to the realm of definitions OR to the realm of empirical facts.

[kaminarigaston]

Example:

1.Martians are living entities that were born and live in Mars. (truth as a DEFINITION)

3.All living entities that were born and live in Mars were also born and live in the solar system.(truth as a DEFINITION)

1.Earthlings are living entities that were born and live in Earth. (truth as a DEFINITION)

5.All entities that were born and live in the solar system are Earthlings. (truth as a FACT, as far as we know)

Therefore: All Martians are Earthlings.

(Continues)

[kaminarigaston]

But the truth of a definition is not the same as the truth of a fact, even if definitions are always truth, they are only REALLY truth if they apply to an existent entity. So they are conditional. (continues)