"DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:0dmdnUTUc8TBQ4rVnZ2dnUVZ_qninZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:SpednTgavPNnSIrVnZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>> news:gNednUlHP43SiYrVnZ2dnUVZ_ozinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> DanielSan wrote:
>>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>>>>> "Michael Scheltgen" <mikesc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:ySyRj.100666$Cj7.57013@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Definition 1: God = Metaphysical X.
>>>>>>>>> Definition 2: Metaphysical = Without physical form or substance.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Theorem: Necessarily, God exists.
>>>>>>>> KM, Not that I disagree with you,
>>>>>>> Playing safe, huh? :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> but what you wrote above appears tautologous.
>>>>>>> One would not reasonably expect tautological logic from Kurt
Gödel.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "One of the most significant logicians of all time, Gödel's work
has
>>>>>>> had immense impact upon scientific and philosophical thinking in
the
>>>>>>> 20th century..." - wiki.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd be interested in seeing a proof of the theorem.
>>>>>>> No problem at all. But first, there is fun to be had with a
>>>>>>> BAAAWAAAAAAHWAAAAH Knight of atheism.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, bugger it. Here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Definition 1: God = Metaphysical X.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Definition 2: Metaphysical = Without physical form or substance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Definition 3: x is God-like iff x has as essential properties
those
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> only those properties which are positive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Definition 4: A is an essence of x iff for every property B, x has
B
>>>>>>> necessarily iff A entails B.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Definition 5: x necessarily exists iff every essence of x is
>>>>>>> necessarily
>>>>>>> exemplified.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Axiom 1: If a property is positive, then its negation is not
>>>>>>> positive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Axiom 2: Any property entailed by a positive property is positive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is positive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Axiom 4: If a property is positive, then it is necessarily
positive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Axiom 5: Necessary existence is positive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Axiom 6: For any property P, if P is positive, then being
>>>>>>> necessarily P is
>>>>>>> positive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Theorem 1: If a property is positive, then it is consistent, i.e.,
>>>>>>> possibly exemplified.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Corollary 1: The property of being God-like is consistent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Theorem 2: If something is God-like, then the property of being
>>>>>>> God-like
>>>>>>> is an essence of that thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Theorem 3: Necessarily, the property of being God-like is
>>>>>>> exemplified.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Corollary 2: Necessarily, God exists.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After I've had my disguting way with the BAAAWAAAAAAHWAAAAH Knight
>>>>>>> of atheism's unwilling body I'll show you precisely where the
killer
>>>>>>> twist of the logic knife is, assuming you don't spot it first, of
>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's redo your "logic" with another imaginary character:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definition 1: Albus Dumbledore = Metaphysical X.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definition 2: Metaphysical = Without physical form or substance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definition 3: x is Dumbledore-like iff x has as essential
properties
>>>>>> those and only those properties which are positive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definition 4: A is an essence of x iff for every property B, x has
B
>>>>>> necessarily iff A entails B.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definition 5: x necessarily exists iff every essence of x is
>>>>>> necessarily
>>>>>> exemplified.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Axiom 1: If a property is positive, then its negation is not
>>>>>> positive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Axiom 2: Any property entailed by a positive property is positive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Axiom 3: The property of being Dumbledore-like is positive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Axiom 4: If a property is positive, then it is necessarily
positive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Axiom 5: Necessary existence is positive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Axiom 6: For any property P, if P is positive, then being
necessarily
>>>>>> P is
>>>>>> positive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Theorem 1: If a property is positive, then it is consistent, i.e.,
>>>>>> possibly exemplified.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Corollary 1: The property of being Dumbledore-like is consistent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Theorem 2: If something is Dumbledore-like, then the property of
>>>>>> being Dumbledore-like is an essence of that thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Theorem 3: Necessarily, the property of being Dumbledore-like is
>>>>>> exemplified.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Corollary 2: Necessarily, Dumbledore exists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, now, let me know where Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and
Wizardry
>>>>>> is. (By the way, if you don't know, you're committing the classic
>>>>>> "begging the question" fallacy.)
>>>>> By the way, if you strip out the diversionary tactics within the
>>>>> "logic" provided, you get to the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> Existence is positive.
>>>>> God is positive.
>>>>> Therefore, God must exist.
>>>>>
>>>>> Existence is positive.
>>>>> Dumbledore is positive.
>>>>> Therefore, Dumbledore must exist.
>>>>>
>>>>> See the fallacy, KM?
>>>>
>>>> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
>>>>
>>>> Translation: He doesn't get it.
>>>>
>>> Axiom 5 is unsup****ted.
>>
>>
>> Unshown assertion. Claim fails.
>
> In order for my claim to fail, you have to show how it's an unshown
> assertion by showing your evidence<*****SLAP>
Taking away your diatribe, you are left with "Axiom 5 is unsup****ted",
which
is a completely unshown assertion. The counter-argument is "Axiom 5 is
sup****ted".
If it is the case that "Axiom 5 is unsup****ted" then you could not have
got
to the question that asked where "Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and
Wizardry" is. So, how did you arrive at that question within the framework
presented to you if "Axiom 5 is unsup****ted"? Hmmm?
--
alt.usenet.kooks
"We are arrant knaves all, believe none of us."
Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1 [129]
Hammer of Thor: February 2007. Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook,
Line & Sinker: September 2005, April 2006, January 2007.
Official Member: Cabal Obsidian Order COOSN-124-07-06660
Official Overseer of Kooks & Trolls in 24hoursup****t.helpdesk
Member of:
Usenet Ruiner List
Top Assholes on the Net List
Most hated usenetizens of all time List
Cog in the AUK Hate Machine List
Find me on Google Maps: 24°39'47.13"S, 134°4'20.18"E
"If it is non-empirical, then it does not exist."
"DanielSan" <danielsan1977@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> asserting that his mind does
not exist. news:IpydnUYo8ssX54zVnZ2dnUVZ_oSunZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The firmware of a router can become sick after awhile of continuous
usage." DUHane Arnold <MR. Arnold@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> giving technical advice.
news:k96dnd110uImNojVnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
