I don't see my question about the possible contradictory nature of the naturalistic materialist worldview being addressed; either everything is matter and constantly changing, or it isn't?
You are creating a false dichotomy. Look it up.
Can you be an atheist and believe in logic and maths?
by passwordprotected 69 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
passwordprotected
Math has many branches including the use of irrational numbers.
In those instances, are the numbers consistently irrational? You see, how would understanding anything work without there being constant and unchanging laws?
-
Terry
I'm just asking the question as to whether claiming that all that exists is matter - and constantly changing matter at that - is contradictory to holding up the laws of logic and maths.
Matter has more than one form. Energy, for example is another form of matter like steam is another form of water (or even ice.)
Things which exist are measurable phenomena.
That is the problem with the nondemonstrable SUPERnatural.
-
notverylikely
I'm just asking the question as to whether claiming that all that exists is matter - and constantly changing matter at that - is contradictory to holding up the laws of logic and maths.
No.....you're trying to prove atheists are inconsistent in their beliefs by setting up a false choice. And there are places where known math and the theories on the how the universe works breaks down. But....science knows this. It's a self correcting system. Your question is as valid as asking you if you have stopped beating your wife yet.
-
passwordprotected
You are creating a false dichotomy
No I'm not. Read what I'm actually asking.
Consider the law of “excluded middle” which says that a proposition is either true or false, there is no third option. What is the ontological foundation of this law? Is this law just a result of the chemical functions in our brain? If so then how is it universal? Is the law material? Of course not! Laws of logic are immaterial abstract entities, the very things that cannot exist if the only thing that exists is matter.
Dan Barker, in a debate with Dr. James White, attempted to refute this argument by saying that “logic is not a thing.” Well if by thinghe means a physical object then I would agree with him. The problem is that he already said that thingsare all that exist. So according to Dan Barker there is no logic.Therefore, either all that exists is matter, constantly changing, or it isn't. A natural materialist has to borrow from someone else's worldview in order to prove what they believe. This contradicts their worldview and as a result makes it false.
-
passwordprotected
Things which exist are measurable phenomena.
Show me a pint of logic.
-
passwordprotected
But....science knows this.
How does science know this if all that exists is matter?
-
OnTheWayOut
I hope Perry finds his way to this thread and you two can laugh at how closed-minded people who disagree with you guys are.
I just hope that you and Perry agree, otherwise you will have to call each other closed-minded. -
notverylikely
In those instances, are the numbers consistently irrational? You see, how would understanding anything work without there being constant and unchanging laws?
Good question!
Gravity was thought to understood once Issac Newton figured out how it worked. But then...measurements from things no on earth (like the orbit of Mercury around the Sun) didn't work using the math that worked on earth. This was a mystery for many years until a bright fellow named Albert figured out that gravity isn't so much a force as a bending of space caused by massive objects. His new ideas perfectly matched up with the observations.
So, did gravity change? no, but the way we humans understood it did once we had more information to figure it out. Our local measurements and experiments worked fine (and we still use the "old" math for calculations that are purely local in nature since they work).
Next question?
-
notverylikely
How does science know this if all that exists is matter?
Matter in it's various forms and interactions, much the same way you know whether your hand is on fire or not, I would suppose.