Total posts: 12,563
-->
@Skipper_Sr
For the sake of argument you are though. I think you'd benefit from looking up the answer for "What is a claim in debate terminology?"
Again, I am not claiming that my claim is true. I come into a debate by arguing that my position is not true.
But, this is contradictory to the function of a debate. Two people are representatives for their chosen side on the topic. You can't represent the side that"nothing is true" because fighting for that is contradictory to what it means.
Again, you have it backwards. I am not representing my side as true. I am representing my side as not true.
Every time you try to defend that nothing is true, you are contradicting the fundamentals of argumentation which is the highest and intelligent form of conversation.
I am not defending that "nothing is true". That is just your assumption. By claiming that nothing is true, I have nothing to defend since I didnt claim that anything is true.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Unless you're one of those philosophers that denies the evidence of their own eyes like a solipsist, science is not a belief system.
Jesus did recommend poking one's own eyes out.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
You are making a claim.
But I am not saying that the claim is true.
Proof?
I dont need to prove my claim, since I never claimed that my claim is correct. You are the only one who needs to prove claims, since you think your claims are correct.
Besides, I think truth doesnt exist. Even if I saw the truth, I wouldnt believe in it because I dont believe my eyes. I believe the almighty unproven God only.
It could be possible that you don't believe what you are saying. But you present yourself like you do believe it.
No. The claim "truth doesnt exist" maintains that nothing is true. Thus, none of my claims need to be proved because I never said they are true.
If what you're saying is not correct, and you admit to that, why should I argue with you?
I dont even know why you argued so far. Arguing against Christians is pointless. I cant come up with any proof of Christian God, but even if you brought up 1000 proofs of science, I still wouldnt believe in any of your proof.
In the words of a famous writer:
"If someone proved to me that Jesus isnt the truth, then I should prefer to remain with Jesus rather than with the truth."
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
He who holds the most power is always the most dangerous
One country, one leader.
It is the law of nature discovered by Hitler in his books.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MAV99
I do not concede to your statements.
Thats fine, I guess.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
One of us is correct, right?
No. Truth doesnt exist, so it is impossible to be correct.
you believe what you are saying is correct
Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that what I am saying is correct. Not sure why you are attacking a strawman like that.
If we should never trust our eyes, what is reality then?
Reality doesnt exist. Nothing is real.
Our vision is a gift from God to let us explore His creation and to enrich our lives
Thats not true. Jesus even recommends poking one's own eyes out to prevent sin. This is how Jesus disproves non-believers.
Is that statement true or not? You are bringing up an exception to the rule, so you need to prove this exception, at least to show that it is more likely than the already established truth logic.
You have it backwards. It is you who needs to prove your rule. I dont need to prove anything since I never claimed that anything is true. In fact, I maintain that true statement doesnt exist.
Circular reasoning is a fallacy, which means it is illogical.
So your circular truth is illogical.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
"Nothing is true, not even this statement." Where does this truth come from?
I never claimed that it is the truth. It is the claim which disproves truth.
Come on man, you know that all statements are either true or not true. To claim not not truth is to claim truth
Truth doesnt exist, thus the fantasy division between truth and not truth doesnt exist either.
I would say that my logic demonstrates the reality that truth is self-evident.
No, that was your claim which is circular logic. Do you think circular logic is true?
If God is truth, then He is self-evident.
If we accept that truth is the proof that truth exists, then the proof for God existing is God. Thus, God is proven.
But my logic is not needed for truth to be true.
Truth doesnt exist, thus truth cannot be true.
No, not my truth. The essence of truth.
The essence of truth is unproven, thus nothing is true.
I'm talking about truth in general
Well, prove that truth exists in general.
, and then you try to shame it by calling it "the truth of the Bible."
If truth exists, then Bible is true. If truth doesnt exist, then we can place our faith in Bible instead.
Are you saying here that truth being self-evident is bad?
I just think that you didnt prove true your circular logic of truth being self evident.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
All atheists believe God the spirit does not exist.
I think they just have problem in choosing which of the 30.000 Gods to believe in.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Where can we see his hatred of minorities being demonstrated?
Usually in his speeches. He talks against LGBT, against migrants, against Mexico... well, he talks against anything which he can represent as a foreign enemy (Hitler's strategy. "Its us vs them").
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Am I correct in saying that you believe proof has to precede truth?
You claim that truth exists. So prove that truth exists. Otherwise, its just faith.
But then I would like to understand what is "proof" to you.Is the world and universe in all of its design evidence?
No. The existence of the world and universe is only evidence if we assume that we should trust our eyes. However, I already explained that we shouldnt trust our eyes. God is by definition greater than our eyes, so why should one believe in what he sees with his own eyes? It is much better to believe in one of the thousands of interpretations of one of the few hundred versions of Bible.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Why is this a problem?
Your logic proves that Jesus-God exists.
Is that a true statement? It's self-defeating to believe in truth that says "there is no truth."
Nothing is true, not even this statement. I already said that I dont believe in truth. I believe in Jesus. No "self defeat" happens, because the statement doesnt claim that its true. It claims that both it and all other statements are not true. This disproves science and truth.
It is unproven--because it's self-evident
So you concede that your truth is unproven. This sounds like victory for the Bible.
All beliefs and religions require some level of faith.
Science is faith, because it relies on circular reasoning. You cannot prove your logic without using your logic. You cannot prove that truth exists without using truth. This is circular reasoning, as you claim that A proves A. If your logic is true, then I say that Christianity is true too because it is proved by Christianity itself. So in all possible scenarios, self-contradicting Bibles wins and science loses.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
What are the similarities between Trump and Hitler?
Hunger for power and hating minorities, as well as nazi salutes used to greet both, but now this new Hitler is in charge of a much more powerful Reich.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Self-evidence doesn't need to be proven
So it cant be proven. Its just faith.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
I'm bringing up the point of truth being the truth whether you believe it or not.Is that something you agree with?
No, I dont agree with your unproved statement. Besides, your logic can be applied to Jesus-God too. Jesus-God is Jesus-God whether you believe in it or not.
This point does not include trying to prove a truth to see if its true.
It also doesnt include any proof that truth even exists.
The truth would already be true whether it is known to you or not
That sounds like an unproved claim.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Are there any similarities between Hitler and Elon besides the controversy that Elon's hand gesture looks like a Nazi salute?
Well, Musk does hate LGBT and migrants, and Musk has payed money for Hitler's campaign.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
OMG, you are going to become another Jim Bakker aren't you?
I already started writing on how vaccines dont work at all and that we should replace all science and medicine with prayers to Jesus. Nothing is true, so we must stop putting our faith in science and start putting our faith in one of the few hundred versions of Bible.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
No it's not circular reasoning.
You said that truth is self-evident (that it proves itself). That is circular reasoning where A is a proof for A.
The truth is the truth
Jesus is Jesus. Does this prove that Jesus exists? If not, then you didnt prove that truth exists either.
It does not adhere to your worldview. It transcends your worldview or any system you try to enforce on it.
That sounds like your unproved belief.
Why can't the truth of Christianity be self-evident if it is the true religion?
Christianity doesnt need to prove itself true. It just needs to bring everything else down to its level.
Created:
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Truth does not need to determine itself as true because truth is self-evident
That is circular reasoning. I can say that Christianity is self-evident too, so Jesus and Hitler win again.
Created:
It seems that Christians have made great arguments which have convinced me to become Christian.
Why should I believe in science, why should I believe in what I can observe, when I can believe in one of the thousands of Gods I randomly selected to believe in?
I used to hold opinion that person should believe in what he can see.
But no. You shouldnt believe in what you can see. You should believe in Christianity instead.
Truth and science are all flawed.
For example, truth requires a system for determining truth. However, a system for determining truth cannot determine itself as true, which makes it flawed.
This disproves all science.
Dont believe in what you can see.
Believe in Jesus instead.
Hail Hitler!
Created:
-->
@cristo71
Oh, poor Eva!
It is proof that people with small penises are superior. Well, at least Hitler is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
People even deny that atheists have belief systems.
Not all atheists are same. Some atheists base their thinking in truth. Same cannot be said for any religious nut.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I concede that you reject science, philosophy, and religion
You forgot that you also concede that you gave link to dictionary which uses same definition of faith as the one I used, while you still refused to provide your own definition. I dont blame you tho. There is no definition of "faith" which you can provide which would work for your case.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
You have to trust but verify. You look like a girl till I verify you also have a small dick.
I appreciate that my small dick is verified.
However, my point was simply that senses are the only way to determine what is true, and by abandoning senses, you have no way to determine what is true, thus you have no way to even choose your religion, let alone prove it or make any decision generally. Holding belief that your religion is true while lacking the way to determine if it is true means that you are committing a logical fallacy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
Then you backed us both up with believing your eyes hence the belief system remains.
Most people believe their eyes and senses. Otherwise, there would be no way to determine truth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
you must first accept the truth of a statement in order to be able to rationally accept it
If there is no agreement on definitions, then there can be no debate. It just becomes ranting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
Many of you on this site debate with what you call sources. You trust the information is true,you believe it and you assert it as evidence.
I dont believe it, I just assert it as evidence.
Person would have to be a retard to trust every source, given how easy it is to manipulate statistics.
It is impossible to not have the existence of belief systems, religions and faiths.
Sure it is. Just start believing your eyes and stop believing the priest.
you rely on probabilities
Kinda hard not to.
If I knew that I am going to die the next day, I probably wouldnt spend this day in same way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Egos-platiniums-locos
You are taking a group of people with different faiths that act differently based on their faiths
Yes. Not sure why you feel the need to describe what I did.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
@MAV99
Guys, its okay. I accept your concessions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
That is not the definition of faith, no matter how many times you proclaim it.
If you are not going to agree on a definition, then there is no debate. Either give a definition you want to debate on, or this wont go anywhere.
Is the rejection of science a precept of your religion?
It was a comment on quantum physics. Even Einstein said that its not perfect because it doesnt have direct observation. When there is no direct observation, then there is only inductive reasoning or by results. Inductive is not perfect because its basically built on assumption that things we cannot observe are acting in same way as things we can observe. If you go by results of things you cant observe, it is like observing the effect while not seeing the cause. So while we know that cause exists and reacts to input, it is still not an observation of a cause. So without direct observation, it is very silly to assume that we can know exactly how it works. We dont even know everything about things we can directly observe. Brain can be observed given enough time, but brain has so many connections that mere amount makes it impossible to observe it effectively, let alone make complete theory from such an observation. With the things you cant observe directly or which rely on flawed observation instruments, it is even harder. Science isnt some magic which gives instantly correct answers. Most scientists spend decades working on theories, and face many failures. It is years of effort which eventually reveal a working theory out of bunch theories out there. Even theory of evolution today isnt same as it was when it was first produced.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Elon Musk helped Trump win. Then went public and did his heart felt Hitler salute. He also spent over 200 million on Trump’s election.
Elon gave him his money and his heart. A true love story!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
If it brings about a change in your life, your faith is true.
Not sure how is that even observed. Like, when I started doing magic, my knowledge increased greatly.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Many other nazis are celebrating Trump's victory too, not just Musk.
Created:
-->
@Shila
One was for Hitler the other for Trump.
For a long time in the past, people lived in belief that there will never be another Hitler to lead them.
Now, finally, the world greets its new Fuhrer. Finally, the world can return to 1934 with a bit different gameplay settings. This time, the gameplay very much favors Hitler.
Created:
After meeting Hitler, Elon Musk said "This is what victory is", then he did a nazi salute two times.
Here is a video from a different angle which shows Musk doing nazi salute two times after he met Hitler:
He was excited, so he did the salute two times instead of one.
Created:
Hitler said that after he wins in 2025, he is going to end all wars in 24 hours.
People elected him and waited exactly 24 hours, but wars didnt stop.
Why would Hitler lie to us at such a difficult time?
"The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it".
"Great liars are also great magicians."
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Compared to some peoples lives, the life that you described would sound like luxury.
In order to have my life, you have to work for it.
I even made a mistake and got a job once. However, once I got a job, I no longer had time for anything. 10 hours of sleep plus 10 hours of job, only 4 hours left per day. Thank God my back started hurting so bad that I had to quit the job and return to a superior lifestyle. I said to myself: it is better to be homeless than to have a job. Having a job means you have no time for anything, so the job serves no purpose in my life. What good is money if I have no time to enjoy it?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
There ware plenty of laughs, smiles, and welcoming!
Hitler was famous for his sense of humor. He often made crowd laugh and cheer during his speeches.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Here is a video from a different angle which shows Musk doing nazi salute two times after he met Hitler:
He was so excited that he met Hitler, so he did the salute twice.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Not just "elect" Hitler, but shake his hand and smile and say "welcome Hitler"
You should usually say hello or hi when you meet someone.
For example:
"Hello Hitler"
Or
"Hi Hitler"
Since you are meeting Hitler, it was common in Germany to do a nazi salute when they meet Hitler.
Why didnt Biden do nazi salute like Musk did when he met Hitler?
Created:
"- Our country is in a bad situation.
- What should we do to fix it?
- We should elect Hitler."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I said I have faith in science
Faith = belief without proof
So you think your belief in science is same as believing in unicorns.
If science is about things you can see, then what is allthat stuff about quantum physics I hear about.
Mostly fantasy, like unicorns. There is an entire army of people writing all kinds of fictional theories, many even contradicting each other. Its all done to milk money from donors, to make it seem like they are doing something. While indirect observations are possible, they are based on inductive reasoning which can be flawed. Basically, they take observation from place A and assume that same exists in place B.
I didn’t say “all faith is true”
How do you determine which faith is true and which faith isnt true?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
You are just a fountain of deep insights, can I quote you on that too?
You can.
If you don't know anything at all about philosophy, then why did you start a thread about philosophy?
The thread is about faith being a logical fallacy. If you want to discuss philosophy, sure. Many philosophers were literally insane. Zeno made pointless arguments about how movement is impossible. Plato believed that you cant actually learn anything except what you already know. Aristotle believed in the existence of soul and made some works of fiction about it. To put it simply, philosophers dont seek truth. They seek to be absurd and mock general knowledge. Philosophers arent really something you go for when seeking truth. This is why science is about observable things. Usually, where observation ends, imagination begins.
It is the topic, you don't even understand your own post?
Topic is: Faith is a logical fallacy.
Thus, things which are not faith are probably irrelevant to the topic.
This idea that everything is faith is your idea, not mine.
You said belief in science is faith. So it seems to be very much your idea.
You are really talking about yourself in this thread, you obviously lack a way to determine what is true, that's why you can't bring yourself to make a true statement.
It is a true statement that faith is a logical fallacy, as proved by its lack of ability to determine whats true.
I think it's time to go back to talking to Shila about your dick.
If girls talk about your dick, its usually a good thing unless they talk about how small or ugly it is.
LOL, oh yes, please do teach me all about science Einstein, I could use me some learning about that science stuff.
Well, first you need to learn about observation. The difference between science and faith is that science is about things you can see, where faith is about things you cant see. For example, if I tell you that I hear the voice of God in my head, you would need faith to believe me. But you say all faith is true, so I guess you would have to believe me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
The question of "what came before" is generally considered to be meaningless within the Standard Model of Cosmology.
I guess they dont believe in cause and effect, even tho they see it everywhere in reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I have faith in science
So your belief in science is faith.
I'm talking about philosophy
Most philosophers were considered insane. Most philosophers begin with logic, but end up with crap.
Is that why you can't give a single example of something you believe that isn't based on faith?
Its irrelevant to the topic. If you think everything is faith, then you lack a way to determine what is true. Science usually uses observations, not faith. This is why they say "proved by observation". They dont say "proved by faith".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
I understand that you think your faith is on equal level as scientific observations, which is a common delusion religious people have.
However, if you lack ability to determine if something is true, then you cannot at the same time have ability to determine if something is true.
This is very simple.
People who have faith by definition have no ability to determine if their belief is true.
If they had such ability, then their belief would be proved and it would be considered scientific.
So, unless you want to change definition of faith, at this point you might as well claim that magic is real.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
It seems that your faith is based on magic.
By abandoning proof, you cannot at the same time have proof.
Proof represents the ability(the system) to determine what is true.
Thus, by abandoning the ability to determine what is true, you cannot at the same time have such ability.
So unless your faith isnt "belief without proof", I think we are done here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
If you want to contradict yourself, fine. I really dont care for your AI response, or your opinion that self-contradicting statement can be true.
an axiom is a statement that is accepted as true without proof
By that logic, everything is an axiom. But no, thats not what axiom is.
This is your belief without proof
I know that your blind faith prevents you from seeing, but here is an explanation.
You cannot remove what determinines what is considered as truth and still determine what is considered as truth.
Proof is by definition something which determines if something is considered true.
Thus, proof is by definition a system for determining truth.
If you remove what determines truth, you cannot determine truth. This is a logical axiom.
Likewise, if you remove the ability to determine what to consider true and what not, then you cannot at the same time maintain such ability.
Not sure what confuses you here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
Do you not know what a logical contradiction is?
System for determining truth is a logical axiom.
If you remove the system and dont replace it with anything, then nothing can be considered true. Thus, your faith isnt true. But it is logically impossible for nothing to be true, thus the mere removal of a system is a logical fallacy.
If you remove the system and say that everything is true, then system also becomes true and you commit a contradiction.
Your only way is to replace this system with another system. But there is no other system for determining truth other than by proof. Thus, since you have no system to replace it with, it remains true.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
In order for something to be considered true, it must be proved to be true.Can you prove that, or do you just take it on faith?
If proof is a requirement for something to be considered true, then the statement is true, as thats what it says.
If proof isnt a requirement for something to be considered true, then the statement above is true again.
Thus, the statement above cannot be "not true".
To say that "Proof isnt a requirement for something to be considered true" is a self negating statement, because if true, then the opposite statement of it must be considered true as well. A logical absurd.
Created: