SE Chat Room #3

Author: Jeff_Goldblum ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 38
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    Thanks to Athias for accepting.

  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    Ok, friend. Thank you again for accepting. Let's begin.

    How do you describe your God belief? To be clear, I am not yet asking you to justify your belief. I am merely asking you to describe the belief.

  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    I believe God exists. I don't engage in rites and religious customs dictating a demonstration of my kowtow or devotion. I do however accept God as a logical consequence of perception. For me, God merely is. 
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    Before we proceed further, can you provide a definition of God?

  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    A spiritual being.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    Can you identify any other attributes of this spiritual being that sets it apart from other hypothetical spiritual beings? For example, how is this God different from ghosts?

    I hope you don't mind me continuing to focus on the definition. I think a high degree of clarity is important before we proceed. I'd hate for misunderstandings to arise because you and I weren't on the same page.
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    Can you identify any other attributes of this spiritual being that sets it apart from other hypothetical spiritual beings? For example, how is this God different from ghosts?
    He/it isn't. I suppose we can parse my use of the term spiritual, but I don't suppose it would make much difference. Furthermore, I don't seek to create a distinction, at least at the moment, between God and ghosts, especially considering that in the Hebraic religions, his tertiary manifestation is the "Holy Ghost." Spiritual being should suffice.

    I hope you don't mind me continuing to focus on the definition. I think a high degree of clarity is important before we proceed. I'd hate for misunderstandings to arise because you and I weren't on the same page.
    Not at all. Ask whatever you deem necessary.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    Ok, so how confident are you that this God (spiritual being) exists? If you wish, you can respond with a scale, 0-100.

    On a scale of 0-100 (0 being "not at all" and 100 being "without a doubt"), how confident are you that your God belief is correct?
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    My confidence reflects the consistency of the logic. Since the logic can be either consistent or inconsistent, my answer therefore can be only 0 or a 100. So I am without doubt that my God belief is correct (100.)
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    Thank you for another swift reply.

    Could you please outline the reason(s) for such a high confidence?
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    Because the arguments I use to substantiate the existence of God operate on a consistent logic and irrefutable premises.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    What are these irrefutable premises/logic, if I may?
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    Sure you may:

    1.

    All which is perceived must exist.
    God is perceived.
    Therefore, God exists.

    The major premise is irrefutable. The minor premise can be subject to parameters, but those very parameters will subject the metrics of counterarguments.

    2.

    All material or spiritual beings exist.
    God is a spiritual being.
    Therefore, God exists.

    The major premise is tautological; the minor premise is tautological
    Even though you are merely inquiring, feel free to challenge if the inclination strikes you.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,651
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @Athias
    He won't. If you observe his other chatrooms, he is intent on gaslighting. He will solely ask why you believe and what makes you so sure over and over again, refusing to quote anything good that you post.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    As a matter of genuine fact-finding, I'm interested to hear more about the following premises:

    God is perceived.
    How is he perceived?

    All material or spiritual beings exist.
    Why is this so?

    I appreciate your continuing participation and your patience with my questions. As you can see, RM is very displeased with my conduct. If I offend you at any point, feel free to stop responding. I will only continue communicating if you continue communicating.
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    How is he perceived?
    God is believed. God is acknowledged by his adherents and even his detractors. Your mere question for example is a demonstration of your perception of God, given that you'd be incapable of acknowledging that which you couldn't perceive. In other words, one couldn't identify nothing. Furthermore, there are those who feel God. That suffices in substantiating that God is perceived.

    Why is this so?

    Then it's simply a matter of establishing a logical equivalence using the definition's converse. God has spiritual being; therefore, God by definition exists.

    I appreciate your continuing participation and your patience with my questions.
    It's no trouble.

    As you can see, RM is very displeased with my conduct.
    That is RationalMadman's issue to deal with.

    If I offend you at any point, feel free to stop responding.
    I don't get offended easily, much less express emotion in venues where they're unnecessary. By that very same token, if you've been "holding back," so to speak, please don't. It's like I said before, "Ask whatever you deem necessary."


  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    I think it might be useful for me to restate what I think you've said in your own words. I think we're reaching some crucial epistemological territory, and I want to ensure we're on the same page. So, let me know if I'm incorrect in restating anything you've said:

    I think you're saying that because believers and deniers can perceive god, god exists. To my understanding, your use of the word "perceive" is synonymous with "imagine" or "conceive." In other words, even a denier can conceive of the notion of god, thus, under your framework, they perceive god, thus making him exist.
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    I think you're saying that because believers and deniers can perceive god, god exists. To my understanding, your use of the word "perceive" is synonymous with "imagine" or "conceive." In other words, even a denier can conceive of the notion of god, thus, under your framework, they perceive god, thus making him exist.
    No. While I do not exclude imagination and conception from the use of the term perceive, I particularly used the words "acknowledged" and "believed." There are several other terms I could use, but I chose "perceived" because it encapsulates many aspects of cognition by relating them. And furthermore, I didn't mention once any "notion" of God.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    So, should I understand your use of the word perceive to be roughly equivalent to acknowledged and believed?

    Thus, if someone believed something, that would mean it is perceived, and because it is perceived it exists?
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    Yes.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    Say there was a jar filled to the brim with many little candies. Suppose also that someone firmly believed the jar contained exactly 1,000 candies. Do 1,000 candies exist within the jar?
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    Say there was a jar filled to the brim with many little candies. Suppose also that someone firmly believed the jar contained exactly 1,000 candies. Do 1,000 candies exist within the jar?
    Nice try. Above I clearly delineate the description of existence, which primarily focuses on state of being. You're clearly asking me to quantify that which is contained in a jar. If I offer you a number--any number--I would then have to accept the mathematical standard upon which your query is premised. Your question doesn't seek to explore the scope of belief, but rather, whether "whim" can invalidate accepted standards.

    Perhaps, you might try again.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    Perhaps I'm slow, because I don't think I understand this very well at all:
    Above I clearly delineate the description of existence, which primarily focuses on state of being. You're clearly asking me to quantify that which is contained in a jar. If I offer you a number--any number--I would then have to accept the mathematical standard upon which your query is premised. Your question doesn't seek to explore the scope of belief, but rather, whether "whim" can invalidate accepted standards.
    I'm so confused that my questions might not even be the right ones to ask, but here I go:

    What is the difference between a description of existence and quantification?

    Perhaps to be more direct, how is the jar of candies example different from God belief?
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 902
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Jeff_Goldblum
    I'm so confused that my questions might not even be the right ones to ask, but here I go:

    What is the difference between a description of existence and quantification?

    Perhaps to be more direct, how is the jar of candies example different from God belief?

    Because you're not asking about existence, you're asking about form using a mathematical standard. So, if I were to say, "yes, there's a 1000 candies in the jar," I would have to accept the number 1000 as 1000, and every other number which relates to the number 1000 as they are. So if there weren't 1000 candies in the jar, it wouldn't qualify its existence, only the metric and abstract used to rationalize that existence. All an incorrect answer would substantiate is that I'm being inconsistent with an accepted standard, not that I'm wrong about the scope of my belief, much less that my belief doesn't inform perception.

    In other words, you're merely asking one to gauge a number, which itself is abstract. And that informs my point.
  • Jeff_Goldblum
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Debates: 10
    Forum posts: 120
    0
    2
    10
    Jeff_Goldblum avatar
    Jeff_Goldblum
    --> @Athias
    So if I did away with the abstraction of quantification, I'd be on track? So, for example, if I said:

    I have a black box, and I tell you there may or may not be a cat inside. You firmly believe there is a cat in the box, therefore a cat exists within the box.