-->
@Tarik
IF we cannot demonstrate our lives have objective meaning THEN we should not care about anything including our own life or death.
Is this your argument or not?
Our most basic axioms
Posts
Total:
1,302
-->
@secularmerlin
Answer my question.
-->
@Tarik
Why do you need such a thing after I already provided you MY premise and conclusion?
In order to evaluate your premise and conclusion for logical inconsistency.
IF we cannot demonstrate our lives have objective meaning THEN we should not care about anything including our own life or death.
Is this your argument or not?
-->
@secularmerlin
In order to evaluate your premise and conclusion for logical inconsistency.
And how does flat out lying on my behalf accomplish that?
-->
@Tarik
IF we cannot demonstrate our lives have objective meaning THEN we should not care about anything including our own life or death.
IF this is your argument THEN I would like to address it. IF it isnot I would like to know what your actual argument is.
-->
@secularmerlin
Answer my question.
-->
@Tarik
And how does flat out lying on my behalf accomplish that?
I was going to ignore this bald assertion/ad hominem attack but since you insist five. When and how did I lie?
Be careful IF I made a syllogism THEN it is conditional statement not a lie.
-->
@secularmerlin
It’s a lie if it’s on my behalf.
-->
@Tarik
It’s a lie if it’s on my behalf.
Even if I had made some statement on your behalf, which I don't recall doing, I don't see how the statement being made on a particular persons behalf would have ANY effect on its truth value.
IF we cannot demonstrate our lives have objective meaning THEN we should not care about anything including our own life or death.
IF this is your argument THEN I would like to address it. IF it isnot I would like to know what your actual argument is.
-->
@secularmerlin
Because I didn’t say it.
-->
@Tarik
Because I didn’t say it.
Please be specific. What did you not say?
-->
@secularmerlin
Whether or not in my syllogism, saying I said so is a flat out lie period.
-->
@Tarik
Following YOUR syllogism to its logical conclusion is NOT lying.
IF we cannot demonstrate our lives have objective meaning THEN we should not care about anything including our own life or death.
IF this is your argument THEN I would like to address it. IF it isnot I would like to know what your actual argument is.
-->
@secularmerlin
Following YOUR syllogism to its logical conclusion is NOT lying.
YOU saying “whether or not” is not following my conclusion because I never said or implied anything remotely close, therefore by definition it’s a lie period.
-->
@Tarik
YOU saying “whether or not” is not following my conclusion because I never said or implied anything remotely close, therefore by definition it’s a lie period.
You don't have to say it if it is a logical necessity granting what you did say.
SO IF and ONLY IF
IF we cannot demonstrate our lives have objective meaning THEN we should not care about anything including our own life or death.
This is your argument
THEN and ONLY THEN my first premise and conclusion BASED on YOUR argument.
IF objective meaning does exist and IF you cannot demonstrate it THEN you still cannot objectively prove your life is meaningful.
My second premise and conclusion BASED on my first premise and conclusion which are BASED on YOUR argument.
IF being unable to prove objectively that your life has meaning makes having any given desire make no sense THEN having that desire makes no sense WHETHER OR NOT objective meaning exists.
This syllogism is logically sound IF and ONLY IF we accept YOUR initial argument.
IF it leads to an uncomfortable or confusing conclusion and you don't like it change your initial argument.
-->
@secularmerlin
You don't have to say it if it is a logical necessity granting what you did say.
But it’s not.
You don't have to say it if it is a logical necessity granting what you did say.But it’s not.
IF we cannot demonstrate our lives have objective meaning THEN we should not care about anything including our own life or death.
IS this your argument?
-->
@secularmerlin
I’m not even gonna address that, I’ve made my argument clear an abundance of times and I refuse to engage in whatever bs game you want to play.
You don't have to say it if it is a logical necessity granting what you did say.
Prove this claim, otherwise don’t waste my time.
-->
@Tarik
This isn't a game it is a clarification. If I understand your argument it leads to the logical necessity of not caring about your own life or death even if there is objective meaning BECAUSE we cannot demonstrate it. We cannot demonstrate it if it exists and we cannot demonstrate it if it doesn't exist.
SO
IF an inability to PROVE objective morality = humans shouldn't care about anything even their own lives AND ID humans are unable to PROVE objective morality it no longer matters from a practical standpoint if objective reality DOES exist. We cannot demonstrate it so we shouldn't care.
In as much as I don't really accept the premise that people should/shouldn't care based on some probably imaginary "objective" meaning in the first place but IF we come to the same practical observation, that whether it exists or not there is no PROOF of any objective meaning THEN what practical difference would its existence make? We cannot PEOVE it THEREFORE we should not care. That is not my argument. It is yours.
IF it is logically necessary to mo longer desire to live if you cannot DEMONSTRATE objective meaning AND you cannot demonstrate objective meaning then it REMAINS logically necessary even if there is some objective meaning we and we cannot demonstrate it.
-->
@secularmerlin
In order to evaluate your premise and conclusion for logical inconsistency.
What’s logically inconsistent about MY ACTUAL WORDS?
-->
@Tarik
What’s logically inconsistent about MY ACTUAL WORDS?
IF the logical conclusion of your argument is logically inconsistent or incorrect THEN your original argument is flawed.
If you are being misrepresented somehow feel free to restate your argument as I have repeatedly repeated mine for you.
-->
@secularmerlin
Answer my question.
Answer my question.What’s logically inconsistent about MY ACTUAL WORDS?
The idea they convey.
-->
@secularmerlin
What logically inconsistent ideas does MY ACTUAL WORDS convey?
-->
@Tarik
Well I have already explained it but if you feel like you are being somehow misrepresented then you are more than welcome to repeat your argument as I have repeatedly posted mine.
-->
@Tarik
Perhaps I can offer a shortcut.
I have baeed my logical necessity from your argument on just two things you have asserted. I'll post them now and you tell me what I'm getting wrong ok?
-->
@Tarik
IF we cannot demonstrate any objective meaning THEN we should not care about human life including our own life.
True or false?
We cannot demonstrate any objective meaning.
True or false?
-->
@secularmerlin
Unless you have a direct quote from me then I don’t want to hear it.
-->
@Tarik
This will be the one thousandth one hundred and thirty ninth post. Can't you just tell me what I'm getting wrong so we can get on with it?
Which specific word have I used that spoils the MEANING of your argument?
-->
@secularmerlin
Instead of accepting my premise and conclusion at face value you run with your own and claim it’s based on mine (which it isn’t) that’s what’s wrong.