Is religion inferior to logic ?

[mikkel_the_dane]

But you do know because there can be no intelligent design without thought which shows you that any diety must have a wave-function and a volume .

No, I don't know that.

 

[zerogain]

Not all logic is accurate, either. Again, let's not make more of it than it is.

By the way, "objective reality" is a subjective paradigm based on an ideological myth. Because "objective evidence" is by definition not possible to obtain. It's an incoherent logic circle.

If it isn't accurate then it isn't logic !

Logic must must have foundations !

 

[zerogain]

No, I don't know that.

You don't have to know something to know its true when based on logical foundations and axioms . To think there is wavefunction involved ?
Wavefunction occupies a volume of space ?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You don't have to know something to know its true when based on logical foundations and axioms . To think there is wavefunction involved ?
Wavefunction occupies a volume of space ?

I won't answer now. Maybe later.

 

[zerogain]

Observation is an act of subjectivity. Therefore, the subject determines the truth. Therefore a person is the truth. Logic.

Observation is only subjective when nothing is defined .

 

[Windwalker]

If it isn't accurate then it isn't logic !

Logic must must have foundations !

Have you never heard the axiom, "Logic is the art of going wrong with confidence"?

 

[Windwalker]

Observation is only subjective when nothing is defined .

Who observes?

 

[sun rise]

1+1=10

 

[Windwalker]

1+1=10

That is absolutely accurate. Just ask any computer.

 

[zerogain]

1+1=10

1=5x

 

[exchemist]

A NRF starts to form in the fetal stage of reproduction of sentient beings , although until birth the NRF is limited . A NRF is dependent to a sentient being senses , human sentients having five natural inherent senses unless there exists a medical condition of the being . All human sentient beings NRF's are born equal , having zero information within the reference frame . Once born , a sentient being starts to acquire information through their inherent senses and this information becomes stored information that becomes their NRF basis . A NRF's acquisition of information can be viewed as being neurological diverse , surrounding circumstances having affect on the information acquired .

A NRF is a neurological reference frame , which is an advanced way of explaining the mind !

Indeed all sentients aren't human , that is an axiom .

BINGO!

 

[zerogain]

That is absolutely accurate. Just ask any computer.

1=5x

I have 1 packet of apples that has 5 apples in the pack , 1+1=10

 

[Windwalker]

1=5x

I have 1 packet of apples that has 5 apples in the pack , 1+1=10

You clearly don't understand the context where 1+1=10 is an absolutely accurate statement. Something is broken in your subjective logic, the "art of going wrong with confidence", is thus proven factually true.

Answer: 1+1=10 is a true statement in binary math systems. Hence the clue of "ask any computer". The computer's subjective reality understands this inherently as factually true. Hence, truth is subjective. It is relative to the subject's context.

Your logic is not so airtight as you presume with confidence.

 

[zerogain]

You clearly don't understand the context where 1+1=10 is an absolutely accurate statement. Something is broken in your subjective logic, the "art of going wrong with confidence", is thus proven factually true.

Answer: 1+1=10 in binary math systems. Hence the clue of "ask any computer".

No , I don't understand your NRF context but my answer was still correct using my NRF context .

1 isn't a constant depending on use

Example ; 1=10mm

 

[Windwalker]

No , I don't understand your NRF context but my answer was still correct using my NRF context .

1 isn't a constant depending on use

Example ; 1=10mm

You changed the equation. I took it exactly as it was presented making it a true statement. You didn't.

BTW, I see you avoided answering my question about "who is observing". Is there a reason for you skipping that reply? See Post #47 above.

 

[zerogain]

You changed the equation. I took it exactly as it was presented making it a true statement. You didn't.

BTW, I see you avoided answering my question about "who is observing". Is there a reason for you skipping that reply? See Post #47 above.

Your question didn't make logical sense because ''who'' refers to people and answers your own question .

 

[The Hammer]

In trying to understand any subject , it is firstly of most importance to understand the first principles of a subject. Any branch of knowledge that is taught , should always have strong routes , from a starting point to a conclusion . If this basic principle is not adhered to , then the practitioner becomes ill-informed , having an inadequate awareness of the facts.
Let us now be clear in our understanding of what is a fact compared to interpretation . A fact is something that is known or proved to be true , it is not something that is solely written on paper . A fact has supporting evidence such as observations , a fact can sometimes be an axiom , something that is self evidently true . If we ignore the facts and/or axioms then we are just being subjective as opposed objective. This information is then ill-informed information and can be misleading to a student ,allowing them false ideologies of a subject .

If a diety existed , then this diety would require the ability to think !

Therefore God = Wavefunction / Volume

Is religion inferior to logic ?

No

 

[PureX]

If it isn't accurate then it isn't logic !

That's an unfounded circular tautology.

 

[RestlessSoul]

The beauty of axioms is it doesn't matter whether we agree or not because they are self evidently true .

A diety would require the ability to think seems pretty self evident to me ! Especially when most scripts , give God a voice !

Axioms are taken as given, and as such are assumed to be true. Which makes them exactly that, assumptions; and one should always be wary of them.

We have to choose a rock upon which to build our church, or our intellectual edifice - but we should not assume that the rock is fixed, or unyielding, or permanent.

 

[paarsurrey]

In trying to understand any subject , it is firstly of most importance to understand the first principles of a subject. Any branch of knowledge that is taught , should always have strong routes , from a starting point to a conclusion . If this basic principle is not adhered to , then the practitioner becomes ill-informed , having an inadequate awareness of the facts.
Let us now be clear in our understanding of what is a fact compared to interpretation . A fact is something that is known or proved to be true , it is not something that is solely written on paper . A fact has supporting evidence such as observations , a fact can sometimes be an axiom , something that is self evidently true . If we ignore the facts and/or axioms then we are just being subjective as opposed objective. This information is then ill-informed information and can be misleading to a student ,allowing them false ideologies of a subject .

If a diety existed , then this diety would require the ability to think !

Therefore God = Wavefunction / Volume

" that is self evidently true "

Yes, G-d is self Evident, please. Right? True?

Regards