Search results for query: *

I see. Sorry to hear that. EB

There could have been a universe illogical in the sense that it wouldn't be open to any mathematical description. Our universe is not like that but why? EB

This is a red herring. We can modify McGee's counterexample as follows, putting everything in the present: McGee's counterexample modified: It is certainly better this way, but we should all be able to interpret McGee's original in this vein without requiring my assistance. EB

So what the Bible says implies that the rapist who can afford to spend 5 years of wages on a rape can escape the death penalty and continue to rape his victim now his wife for as long as he feels like it. Whoa. Holy Book. Impressively Good Book. It only figures once you admit the thing was...

I try to discourage idiots but it doesn't work. :cheer: EB

Your comment doesn't make any sense. I don't know what you mean or are trying to mean. I wouldn't vote for you, that's for sure. EB

I hope this will be helpful. EB

:rub: :rub: EB

This is a stupid remark. You have no idea what I do. I was also replying to aupmanyav's erroneous comment, and you interjected with an irrelevant remark. And now, LOL, you pontificate from the vantage point of your ignorance. Well, yes, but the brain also works consciously, no? This certainly...

Yes? And how is that relevant? Dictionary definitions try to be statements of what people mean. They don't provide encyclopedic or scientific context. When aupmanyav says of the definition, "That is not true", he is just demonstrating he either doesn't understand what a definition is, or what...

Not true?! This is a dictionary definition of the word. This is what proficient speakers of English mean when they use the word "intuition". Here is a dictionary definition of the word "definition", just to clear any ambiguity in what you understand of what I say: EB

I don't know but in any case this is not what the argument claims. I knew it would be a bit too difficult to parse. EB

Sure, but that is not at all what the argument claims. EB

Circular reasoning. EB

Thank you to vote before commenting. EB

I still don't know what you have to object. EB

This argument may be a bit difficult to parse, but it is definitely either valid or not valid. So, if you have an opinion, thanks to share it. EB

So something exists that I label God. Good we could agree on that. EB

Thus, proof that atoms exist only results in the existence of atoms being widely accepted as true. This is of course very different from us knowing that atoms exist, since it may be false even if we all accept it as true. Prove it. We are unable to prove that we are in a "state of knowing"...

Yes? So you trust your intuition on that? EB