Deities cannot exist because of their consciousness

Wolf Kirchmeir wwolfkir at sympatico.can
Mon Dec 1 19:22:36 EST 2003


On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 14:29:43 GMT, Dio wrote:

>
>Wolf Kirchmeir ha scritto nel messaggio ...
>CUT
>
>I think you're a believer. Every believer says that God exists and
>demonstration against its existence are false, as you are saying:)
>
>bye bye

No. I'm saying your argument invalid - it does not, and cannot, prove what it
sets out to prove. Arguments are not "true" or "false", they are "valid" or
"invalid," which is something else again.

As I've said before: Go take a course in logic. You haven't the faintest idea
how to construct a valid argument, nor how to determine the validity of an
argument.

BTW, as several people have pointed out, it's not possible to prove either
that "god" exists or does not exist by any appeal to human experience or
knowledge, since _by definition_ a "god" is supernatural. Since _all_
arguments about the existence of "god" must include one or more premises
based on human experience or knowledge, all arguments that purport to prove
that "god" exists, or that "god" does not exist, are invalid.

Note also that premises stating a belief automatically invalidate any
arguments in which they occur, since a statement of belief has no truth
value. That means that the truth value of the conclusion of such an argument
is either indeterminate, which means the argument is invalid;. or
determinate, in which case the belief statement is superfluous.

Your argument also assumes that "god" is immaterial. That's a belief
statement about "god,"  and therefore is inadmissible. The remaining two main
premises of your argument could be used to prove that "god", if it exists, is
material.

You lose the game, again.


-- 
Wolf Kirchmeir, Blind River ON Canada
"Nature does not deal in rewards or punishments, but only in consequences."
(Robert Ingersoll)






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list