• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Prove you Exist.

sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Peace said:
I am typing these words which you will see once posted, so I do exist :D
Click to expand...
That is a logical fallacy called "Affirming the Consequent."

The fallacy of affirming the consequent is committed by arguments that have the form:
(1) If A then B
(2) B
Therefore:
(3) A
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Kungfuzed said:
If I step on a scale you can determine my weight. You can observe the effect I have on objects around me as I move and manipulate them. If you stick a thermometer in me you can measure my temperature. You can examine my body and test my DNA to determine my species. Practically any of the criteria used to determine any objects existence can be used to determine my existence.
Click to expand...
Please present that as a formal logical argument.
 
godischange

godischange

Member
Prove that who exists?

You just recognised that I exist by asking me to prove something. Unless you're a lunatic and you're purposefully talking to someone/thing that doesn't exist, you pretty much did my job for me.

As for addressing your idea of logic:
  1. premises - My premise is that someone must be typing. Do you agree? If not, we can't really go much further because we have to assume that you're conversing with someone who isn't there.
  2. inference- We can infer that if someone is typing, then that someone must physically exist to have the capacity to type.
  3. conclusion- We can therefore conclude that the someone who is typing exists.
 
Yes Man

Yes Man

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I cannot prove that I exist to you. I could be someone or I could be a part of this reality that you have chosen to accept (or not). So.....

I can never be proven real to you. Why? Because reality is objective, you cannot even prove that you exist to yourself. Not really. Reality is not what you perceive, it is reality. Therefore you can never know what is truly real you can only infer that the reality you are experiencing is indeed real.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
godischange said:
Prove that who exists?

You just recognised that I exist by asking me to prove something. Unless you're a lunatic and you're purposefully talking to someone/thing that doesn't exist, you pretty much did my job for me.

As for addressing your idea of logic:
  1. premises - My premise is that someone must be typing. Do you agree? If not, we can't really go much further because we have to assume that you're conversing with someone who isn't there.
  2. inference- We can infer that if someone is typing, then that someone must physically exist to have the capacity to type.
  3. conclusion- We can therefore conclude that the someone who is typing exists.
Click to expand...
That is a logical fallacy called "Affirming the Consequent."

The fallacy of affirming the consequent is committed by arguments that have the form:
(1) If A then B
(2) B
Therefore:
(3) A
 
ChristineES

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
Everyone here could be pretending to be someone else. As far as I know you could all be just one person. That certainly would not be logical, considering that sometimes people post at the same time at many different posts.

Note- I once belonged to a forum in which one person was posting for about 8 different people. It took us a while to figure it out, but she gave herself away by making the posts of these different people sound too much alike and we all caught on. :D
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Peace said:
Then the best solution for you is to slap your face, sorry no offense meant, and if you feel the hurt then you will know that you are not imagining things or dreaming :D
Click to expand...
That reminds me of the scene from "the Lion King."

Simba: I know what I have to do. But going back will mean facing my past. I've been running from it for so long.
[Rafiki hits Simba on the head with his stick]
Simba: Ow! Jeez, what was that for?
Rafiki: It doesn't matter. It's in the past.
[laughs]
Simba: Yeah, but it still hurts.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
ChristineES said:
Everyone here could be pretending to be someone else. As far as I know you could all be just one person. That certainly would not be logical, considering that sometimes people post at the same time at many different posts.

Note- I once belonged to a forum in which one person was posting for about 8 different people. It took us a while to figure it out, but she gave herself away by making the posts of these different people sound too much alike and we all caught on. :D
Click to expand...
Ok. Give a formal logical proof that anything exists.
 
S

Somkid

Well-Known Member
sandy whitelinger said:
It's not philosophy I want it's a formal logical argument I'm after.
Click to expand...

You are confusing rhetorical nonsense with philosophy what I am telling you is formal and logical it is also philosophy because that is the point of philosophy. The problem is most people have the idea that philosophy is rhetorical nonsense but they are mistaken and don't have a clue what philosophy is.
 
Willamena

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Peace said:
Then the best solution for you is to slap your face, sorry no offense meant, and if you feel the hurt then you will know that you are not imagining things or dreaming :D
Click to expand...
The point is: "what if?"

What if it's real, that I am really imagining you? I could be imagining the pain, too.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Somkid said:
You are confusing rhetorical nonsense with philosophy what I am telling you is formal and logical it is also philosophy because that is the point of philosophy. The problem is most people have the idea that philosophy is rhetorical nonsense but they are mistaken and don't have a clue what philosophy is.
Click to expand...
I gave you a format for a formal logical argument.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Willamena said:
The point is: "what if?"

What if it's real, that I am really imagining you? I could be imagining the pain, too.
Click to expand...
Whether it's actually there or not is not always applicable to a logical argument. Since no one has offered a formal logical proof for existance then I'll have to assume that logic is not as applicable to proof of existance.
 
sandy whitelinger

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
Willamena said:
Is that a logical conclusion, Sandy? Or a jumped-to one?
Click to expand...
It could fall under the "Argument from Ignorance" fallacy.

Arguments from ignorance infer that a proposition is true from the fact that it is not known to be false. Example
(1) No one has been able to disprove the existence of God.
Therefore:
(2) God exists.

Not all arguments of this form are fallacious; if it is known that if the proposition were not true then it would have been disproven, then a valid argument from ignorance may be constructed. In other cases, though, arguments from ignorance are fallacious.

In order for my proposition to be untrue then there needs to be a valid logical proof offered for existance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top