cope
already did
Link the paper, which journal did it get published in ?already did
i am a slave of God obviously, not being able to admit a higher existence is proof of your incompetence, but ig just cope and hope there is no afterlife that you will burn in for eternity jfl
It’s minor, it belonged to my official debate but you’d need a fair metafysical comprehension to understand it properly
I can always get assistance. I know a friend who is a prof in philosophy. He'd be interested in seeing the paper. He could explain it to me, since I am meeting him this weekend
religion is cope you only believe cause you were taught to now you lost all ability of logical thinking
religion was made in the neolithic revolution because humans got bored and became scared of death so they needed something to cope with
provide evidence for the premise. also what law of logic have i disregarded in my argument? did i commit any fallacies, if yes name them
it is though, i just did with my argument, can you disprove it
define a universal truth
Something that is true for all across all cultures and times
You're the one who said first "universal truth", now you can't even define it?
perfect, a truth is by definition a concept. a concept is necessarily a mental entity, which therefore requires a mind of some sorts to be produced by. let’s take the law of non contradiction for an example. this law was true before humans even existed. but there was no human mind to produce this concept. if you say that the law didn’t exist before humans existed or was wrong before humans existed than—ad absurdism (you believe contradictions can partake in ontological reality). if you say that the law was true before humans existed, then you admitted there must be some other sort of mind that could derive the law before the existence of humans. this mind is what we would call God.
I obviously can, i was making sure you understood my terminology and are capable of providing the required intellectual capacityYou're the one who said first "universal truth", now you can't even define it?
Ok, then say what it means and give a few examples...
loll
respond to the argument i procided
something that is true for all possible instances (so all places, all times and all contingencies). examples are the laws are logic. but i just gave you the argument, respond to jt
What argument? I've just told you that god is a human construct. Therefore your idea of a "universal truth" is flawed and also a human construct
pls read my respond, i’ll try to find the paper
What? What logic, what laws?
you are asserting its a humans construct, not proving its a human construct
Well it's still an argument against yours, which you can't counter. So you may as well have not made this post since it doesn't bring anything new
lolll, the three laws of logic. the law of non contradiction, the law of identity and the law excluded middle. but if you aren’t even familiar with these laws, ig you aren’t educated enough to conduct this argument. btw i’m talking about my other respons to you. where i lay out why God a necessary precondition for universal truths
an assertion is not an argument retarded faggot. learn some basic argumentation before you come on my post
The mistake is thinking truth needs a mind to exist but stuff like logic can just be true on its own, even without anyone around to think it
Who are you referring to here? Your post is as much of an argument as mine
What‘s your onlyfans?
there are two modes of existence. ontological and conceptual. which do universal truths fall under
it isn’t, i gave a syllogism, you didnt
that’s a secret
in a sense. the universal truth, such as the law of non contradiction would be produced by a rational intellect. that is what we would call god
Lol, study quantum mechanics and you'll see that all the logical "laws" disappear in the quantum realm - particles can have multiple states at the same time, they can both exist and not exist, can be in multiple places, they can appear or disappear spontaneously without a reason, all sorts of things and weird effects can happen and only after that a cause can appear, etc....so much for the "universal truth" of logic...
Ontological
This is an argument, since I argued god and your concept of universal truths are a human construct, and you argue they're not. Universal truths are beyond human understanding
i have boyo, a contradiction is a p and -p tell me what the p and -p is in the case of a superposition. something have multiple locations doesn’t violate the law of non contradiction. if it does, provide the p and -p
they aren’t though. you are just saying they are, but not giving a reason, or an argument for why that is the case
You haven't given an argument as to why it's not a human construct
That is a metaphysical assumption. You are asserting not demonstrating the premise. Platonism can very well explain the nature of logic without a higher entity to produce it
