On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 18:17:18 GMT, Dio wrote:
>>Would you mind to say if those premises are false?
>Never mind about my conclusion, you said that my premises are false.
>>Please, demonstre that: you are welcome!!
As I've said before, their truth or falsehood irrelevant. But just to be nice
to you, I'll give you my opinions: #1 is true, I suppose, since God says
"I". #2 may be true for consciousness when referring to material beings, if
you mean "material brain" for "brain." But it is false when referring to
immaterial beings, since immaterial, conscious beings don't have a material
brain, and God or "god" is by definition non-material.
Not that it matters, since you argument is invalid. Your argument is invalid
because you using a proposition about material entities to argue about the
existence of non-material entities, which is the error of _confounding
categories_. You might as well claim the "god" does not exist because rocks
do exist. As I said before, go take a course in logic.
If your next post illustrates some understanding of what I've said, I may
decide to continue your education. Otherwise, goodbye.
Wolf Kirchmeir, Blind River ON Canada
"Nature does not deal in rewards or punishments, but only in consequences."