Total Posts:62|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Self refuting statements.

GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:03:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

You are an idiot.

This is the troll line,
________________________________________________
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:05:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Here's a few more;

"There is no truth, but perhaps all we can know about the truth is that the truth is, there is no truth."

"Relativism is the belief that there are no absolutes, apart from this absolute."

"I have no reason to believe what people say is true."

"No one can tell anyone else what to do, thank you very much!"

Can you spot the self refutation in these quotes?
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:06:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:03:14 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

You are an idiot.

This is the troll line,
________________________________________________
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:09:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

If we never know anything, we have to assume some things are true so that we make decisions. Do you understand now?
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:10:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Some of the truest truths are truly paradoxes.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:10:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
: At 2/7/2011 11:03:14 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

You are an idiot.

This is the troll line,
________________________________________________


I guess I was being a troll by mentioning rogue, but people do it all the time to me. Athough that really isn't an excuse. Let just forget about that however and make the most out of this thread without insulting or pointing out any ones fault. Agreed?
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:12:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
: At 2/7/2011 11:09:28 PM, rogue wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

If we never know anything, we have to assume some things are true so that we make decisions. Do you understand now?


Umm, not quite no.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:12:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:10:44 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:03:14 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

You are an idiot.

This is the troll line,
________________________________________________


I guess I was being a troll by mentioning rogue, but people do it all the time to me.

You are fair game.

Athough that really isn't an excuse. Let just forget about that however and make the most out of this thread without insulting or pointing out any ones fault. Agreed?

I'll get my coat.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.


Haha, what, why?
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:53:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Unless you are a solipsist, you are going to have to make at least one huge assumption.. Even if you are purely scientific and rational, all of your knowledge relies on that one assumption.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
vardas0antras
Posts: 983
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 11:50:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.
No offence.
"When he awoke in a tomb three days later he would actually have believed that he rose from the dead" FREEDO about the resurrection of Jesus Christ
m93samman
Posts: 2,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 12:01:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I hate haters.
: At 4/15/2011 5:29:37 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
: Pascal's wager is for poosies.
:
: I mean that sincerly, because it's basically an argument from poooosie.
:
: I'm pretty sure that's like a fallacy.. Argument ad Pussium or something like that.
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 1:12:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 12:01:59 PM, m93samman wrote:
I hate haters.

I'm not a hater I just find it funny that GS makes points which are commonly well refuted and he keeps trying to make the same points. I have nothing against him and I apologize if I am coming off as offensive.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 1:25:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.

Are you having a laugh? Of course is self refuting. We do not know whether we will know everything there is to know, But rogue assumes that we will never know everything to be known, that sir, is an assumption. Even worse, she says that we have to make assumptions because we cannot know everything, yet that, in it's self is an assumption. So therefore it isn't rationally true, yet it might be.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 1:32:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 11:53:04 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Unless you are a solipsist, you are going to have to make at least one huge assumption.. Even if you are purely scientific and rational, all of your knowledge relies on that one assumption.

Solipsists assume that reality is created by the mind and that nothing out side the mind exists. They believe that existence is thought based rather than externally based. As for yet, I haven't found anything contrary to Christian believe to solipsism.
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 2:33:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 1:25:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.

Are you having a laugh? Of course is self refuting. We do not know whether we will know everything there is to know, But rogue assumes that we will never know everything to be known, that sir, is an assumption. Even worse, she says that we have to make assumptions because we cannot know everything, yet that, in it's self is an assumption. So therefore it isn't rationally true, yet it might be.

Just because she makes an assumption in a statement about assumptions does not mean it's self-refuting. She may be wrong about there always being unkown but that has nothing to do with whether or not the statement is self-refuting.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 2:58:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 1:32:31 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:53:04 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Unless you are a solipsist, you are going to have to make at least one huge assumption.. Even if you are purely scientific and rational, all of your knowledge relies on that one assumption.

Solipsists assume that reality is created by the mind and that nothing out side the mind exists. They believe that existence is thought based rather than externally based. As for yet, I haven't found anything contrary to Christian believe to solipsism.

I don't think I understand your last statement.

Are you saying that Christianity and Solipsism do not conflict?

Or do you think I'm trying to convince of solipsism?(Which I am not, I think it is a stupid world view to have)
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 7:35:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 2:33:20 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/8/2011 1:25:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.

Are you having a laugh? Of course is self refuting. We do not know whether we will know everything there is to know, But rogue assumes that we will never know everything to be known, that sir, is an assumption. Even worse, she says that we have to make assumptions because we cannot know everything, yet that, in it's self is an assumption. So therefore it isn't rationally true, yet it might be.

Just because she makes an assumption in a statement about assumptions does not mean it's self-refuting. She may be wrong about there always being unknown but that has nothing to do with whether or not the statement is self-refuting.

I think it is, you cannot assume an assumption. To say that we have to make assumptions so that we can assume more is fallacious. What rogue said was that we have to make assumptions because we will never know everything to be known. But within that is an assumption it's self. Self refuting. In that there is no rationality being used, just a plan guess. And even worse, the guess is guest at.
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:35:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 7:35:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/8/2011 2:33:20 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/8/2011 1:25:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.

Are you having a laugh? Of course is self refuting. We do not know whether we will know everything there is to know, But rogue assumes that we will never know everything to be known, that sir, is an assumption. Even worse, she says that we have to make assumptions because we cannot know everything, yet that, in it's self is an assumption. So therefore it isn't rationally true, yet it might be.

Just because she makes an assumption in a statement about assumptions does not mean it's self-refuting. She may be wrong about there always being unknown but that has nothing to do with whether or not the statement is self-refuting.

I think it is, you cannot assume an assumption. To say that we have to make assumptions so that we can assume more is fallacious. What rogue said was that we have to make assumptions because we will never know everything to be known. But within that is an assumption it's self. Self refuting. In that there is no rationality being used, just a plan guess. And even worse, the guess is guest at.

Ok I think the problem here is your use of the the term self-refuting. In order for it to be self-refuting, the statement would have to contradict itself by affirming and denying the same thing or what-have-you. All you've said in support of her statement being self-refuting is that it uses bad or no logic, which has nothing to do with whether or not it's a contradiction.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:40:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 10:35:29 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/8/2011 7:35:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/8/2011 2:33:20 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/8/2011 1:25:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.

Are you having a laugh? Of course is self refuting. We do not know whether we will know everything there is to know, But rogue assumes that we will never know everything to be known, that sir, is an assumption. Even worse, she says that we have to make assumptions because we cannot know everything, yet that, in it's self is an assumption. So therefore it isn't rationally true, yet it might be.

Just because she makes an assumption in a statement about assumptions does not mean it's self-refuting. She may be wrong about there always being unknown but that has nothing to do with whether or not the statement is self-refuting.

I think it is, you cannot assume an assumption. To say that we have to make assumptions so that we can assume more is fallacious. What rogue said was that we have to make assumptions because we will never know everything to be known. But within that is an assumption it's self. Self refuting. In that there is no rationality being used, just a plan guess. And even worse, the guess is guest at.

Ok I think the problem here is your use of the the term self-refuting. In order for it to be self-refuting, the statement would have to contradict itself by affirming and denying the same thing or what-have-you. All you've said in support of her statement being self-refuting is that it uses bad or no logic, which has nothing to do with whether or not it's a contradiction.

Ok fine I summit, it isn't a contradiction, simply an assertion which can never be proved right or wrong. I think I got the idea that it was self refuting because she claimed it to be true without reason, if you see me?
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:40:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'd like to press the question.

Does solipsism conflict with Christianity according to Godsands?
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
tornshoe92
Posts: 361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:42:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 10:40:01 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:35:29 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/8/2011 7:35:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/8/2011 2:33:20 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/8/2011 1:25:58 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:56:42 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:37:29 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:29:26 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 11:24:38 PM, GodSands wrote:
: At 2/7/2011 11:19:17 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...

I'll start. "Assumptions have to be made because there are a lot of things we will never know." (Said by rogue).

I was drinking Sprite and almost choked. Thanks.



Haha, what, why?

Your post was so hilariously ridiculous.

Ok, although I am still not completey sure what you found funny.

1) This whole thread sounds like it was started to bash a select couple of peoples' statements. Might not be true but that's how it sounds.

2) The statement is not self-refuting.

3) You've been told multiple times why it isn't self-refuting.

4) Every forum post by you is starting to look the same.

Are you having a laugh? Of course is self refuting. We do not know whether we will know everything there is to know, But rogue assumes that we will never know everything to be known, that sir, is an assumption. Even worse, she says that we have to make assumptions because we cannot know everything, yet that, in it's self is an assumption. So therefore it isn't rationally true, yet it might be.

Just because she makes an assumption in a statement about assumptions does not mean it's self-refuting. She may be wrong about there always being unknown but that has nothing to do with whether or not the statement is self-refuting.

I think it is, you cannot assume an assumption. To say that we have to make assumptions so that we can assume more is fallacious. What rogue said was that we have to make assumptions because we will never know everything to be known. But within that is an assumption it's self. Self refuting. In that there is no rationality being used, just a plan guess. And even worse, the guess is guest at.

Ok I think the problem here is your use of the the term self-refuting. In order for it to be self-refuting, the statement would have to contradict itself by affirming and denying the same thing or what-have-you. All you've said in support of her statement being self-refuting is that it uses bad or no logic, which has nothing to do with whether or not it's a contradiction.

Ok fine I summit, it isn't a contradiction, simply an assertion which can never be proved right or wrong. I think I got the idea that it was self refuting because she claimed it to be true without reason, if you see me?

Yep I get ya'.
"Next time I see a little old lady going to church I am going kick her in the ovaries because she is personally responsible for this. Thanks Izbo." -C_N
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:43:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'd also like to ask GodSands if he considers himself to be a solipsist.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Aibohphobia
Posts: 136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:48:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 7:35:21 PM, GodSands wrote:
At 2/8/2011 2:33:20 PM, tornshoe92 wrote:
At 2/8/2011 1:25:58 PM, GodSands wrote:

Are you having a laugh? Of course is self refuting. We do not know whether we will know everything there is to know, But rogue assumes that we will never know everything to be known, that sir, is an assumption. Even worse, she says that we have to make assumptions because we cannot know everything, yet that, in it's self is an assumption. So therefore it isn't rationally true, yet it might be.

Just because she makes an assumption in a statement about assumptions does not mean it's self-refuting. She may be wrong about there always being unknown but that has nothing to do with whether or not the statement is self-refuting.

I think it is, you cannot assume an assumption. To say that we have to make assumptions so that we can assume more is fallacious. What rogue said was that we have to make assumptions because we will never know everything to be known. But within that is an assumption it's self. Self refuting. In that there is no rationality being used, just a plan guess. And even worse, the guess is guest at.

Made me lol. I've never heard the word assumption used so many times.
tigg13
Posts: 302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2011 12:37:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/7/2011 10:54:26 PM, GodSands wrote:
For the hell of it, post as many as you can think. If necessary notify the person who said the self refuting assertion/statement or whatever...


"God is all powerful. There is no limit to what He can do. But God cannot do things like tell lie or brake promises or disappoint because they are signs of being powerless."

Guess who said this?