Total Posts:227|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

I, Apeiron, Call F-16

Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:42:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Debate me here,

http://www.debate.org...

You were vehemently against this argument before, but I am calling your weak objections to the arena.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:47:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Among philosophers, yes. Show me one philosopher who thinks 2-6 are controversial and I'll show you 10 who don't.
inferno
Posts: 10,628
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:48:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:42:14 PM, Apeiron wrote:
Debate me here,

http://www.debate.org...

You were vehemently against this argument before, but I am calling your weak objections to the arena.

Winning a debate does not mean that you are correct or what you say is true. =)
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:48:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:47:11 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Among philosophers, yes. Show me one philosopher who thinks 2-6 are controversial and I'll show you 10 who don't.

Do you actually think it's step 1 that atheists have a problem with? Honestly? Because I don't.
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:53:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:42:14 PM, Apeiron wrote:
Debate me here,

http://www.debate.org...

You were vehemently against this argument before, but I am calling your weak objections to the arena.

Stop doing this. Either challenge by posting on his profile or by PM.
Tsar of DDO
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:55:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:48:26 PM, inferno wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:42:14 PM, Apeiron wrote:
Debate me here,

http://www.debate.org...

You were vehemently against this argument before, but I am calling your weak objections to the arena.

Winning a debate does not mean that you are correct or what you say is true. =)

Der
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:56:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:48:48 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:47:11 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Among philosophers, yes. Show me one philosopher who thinks 2-6 are controversial and I'll show you 10 who don't.

Do you actually think it's step 1 that atheists have a problem with? Honestly? Because I don't.

like I said, show me one philosopher who thinks 2-6 are controversial and I'll show you 10 who don't.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:56:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:53:59 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:42:14 PM, Apeiron wrote:
Debate me here,

http://www.debate.org...

You were vehemently against this argument before, but I am calling your weak objections to the arena.

Stop doing this. Either challenge by posting on his profile or by PM.

No, in fact absolutely not.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:58:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
My only real issue with 1, is that I have no clue what a 'maximally great' being is. It's such a subjective term.

I take real issue with 3 and 4 though. I see no reason in those leaps of logic.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 4:58:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

LOL.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:00:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:56:29 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:53:59 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:42:14 PM, Apeiron wrote:
Debate me here,

http://www.debate.org...

You were vehemently against this argument before, but I am calling your weak objections to the arena.

Stop doing this. Either challenge by posting on his profile or by PM.

No, in fact absolutely not.

Making threads like this makes you look like a prick, and is generally irritating. Obviously, I can't stop you from doing it -but that's beside the point. The point is that there are ways that this sort of thing is done, and this isn't socially acceptable.

'Nuff said.
Tsar of DDO
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:20:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:58:26 PM, muzebreak wrote:
My only real issue with 1, is that I have no clue what a 'maximally great' being is. It's such a subjective term.

I take real issue with 3 and 4 though. I see no reason in those leaps of logic.

Cool.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:22:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:20:16 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:58:26 PM, muzebreak wrote:
My only real issue with 1, is that I have no clue what a 'maximally great' being is. It's such a subjective term.

I take real issue with 3 and 4 though. I see no reason in those leaps of logic.

Cool.

Yeah, I thought so too.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:23:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:00:06 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:56:29 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:53:59 PM, YYW wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:42:14 PM, Apeiron wrote:
Debate me here,

http://www.debate.org...

You were vehemently against this argument before, but I am calling your weak objections to the arena.

Stop doing this. Either challenge by posting on his profile or by PM.

No, in fact absolutely not.

Making threads like this makes you look like a prick, and is generally irritating. Obviously, I can't stop you from doing it -but that's beside the point. The point is that there are ways that this sort of thing is done, and this isn't socially acceptable.

'Nuff said.

Therein lies your mistake friend... (I don't give a single whit on what's socially acceptable.)

In fact I should hope no one in their right mind live their lives by the standards of what society deems acceptable. Please.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:24:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:22:36 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:20:16 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:58:26 PM, muzebreak wrote:
My only real issue with 1, is that I have no clue what a 'maximally great' being is. It's such a subjective term.

I take real issue with 3 and 4 though. I see no reason in those leaps of logic.

Cool.

Yeah, I thought so too.

Word.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:26:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:24:05 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:22:36 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:20:16 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:58:26 PM, muzebreak wrote:
My only real issue with 1, is that I have no clue what a 'maximally great' being is. It's such a subjective term.

I take real issue with 3 and 4 though. I see no reason in those leaps of logic.

Cool.

Yeah, I thought so too.

Word.

Ye dog.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:27:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Using the logic from the ontological argument, there should be a world in which no maximally great being exists, therefore excluding the possibility of a maximally great being being maximally great.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:27:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:26:59 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:24:05 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:22:36 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:20:16 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:58:26 PM, muzebreak wrote:
My only real issue with 1, is that I have no clue what a 'maximally great' being is. It's such a subjective term.

I take real issue with 3 and 4 though. I see no reason in those leaps of logic.

Cool.

Yeah, I thought so too.

Word.

Ye dog.

99 problems brotha...
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:29:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Of course he is for real. It's reasonable to not accept premise 1 as true, but the other premises are uncontroversial. Anybody who argues against the other premises, just doesn't understand the Modal operators involved.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:30:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:27:50 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
Using the logic from the ontological argument, there should be a world in which no maximally great being exists, therefore excluding the possibility of a maximally great being being maximally great.

The OA uses advanced modal logic.

Your objection is question begging, your only reason for believing it is because you think maximal greatness is impossible, but why?

In my argument I give 3 arguments for accepting P1.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:31:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:48:48 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:47:11 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Among philosophers, yes. Show me one philosopher who thinks 2-6 are controversial and I'll show you 10 who don't.

Do you actually think it's step 1 that atheists have a problem with? Honestly? Because I don't.

Then you are a Theist necessarily! Hallelujah, praise Jesus!
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:31:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:29:51 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Of course he is for real. It's reasonable to not accept premise 1 as true, but the other premises are uncontroversial. Anybody who argues against the other premises, just doesn't understand the Modal operators involved.

Excuse me for not coming to the conclusion that something exists because it might exist.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:32:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:29:51 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Of course he is for real. It's reasonable to not accept premise 1 as true, but the other premises are uncontroversial. Anybody who argues against the other premises, just doesn't understand the Modal operators involved.

Again, this is epistemic possibility you're referring to here. P1 involves metaphysical possibility with warrant.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:33:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:32:12 PM, Apeiron wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:29:51 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Of course he is for real. It's reasonable to not accept premise 1 as true, but the other premises are uncontroversial. Anybody who argues against the other premises, just doesn't understand the Modal operators involved.

Again, this is epistemic possibility you're referring to here. P1 involves metaphysical possibility with warrant.

I know the difference between epistemic possibility and modal possibility.
Apeiron
Posts: 2,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:33:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 5:31:55 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 4/18/2013 5:29:51 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

Of course he is for real. It's reasonable to not accept premise 1 as true, but the other premises are uncontroversial. Anybody who argues against the other premises, just doesn't understand the Modal operators involved.

Excuse me for not coming to the conclusion that something exists because it might exist.

You're referring to contingent things in that "something" ... way to go lol
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:33:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 4:43:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
"Steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial, the crucial premise is 1."

Are you for real?

I would add the definition of a MGB to the controversial aspects of the argument, but the iron Ape is correct: steps 2-6 are largely uncontroversial.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 5:33:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The ontological argument would come to the conclusion a maximally great being exists even if there wasn't one. That's a slight problem.