• 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!

Is this Proof of Lord?

questfortruth

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Policy said:
Neither Nietzsche nor nihilism is relevant to your lacking the abilities to know the things that you claim to know. You're just saying random things.
Click to expand...
It is natural for ordinary persons to feel distrust and rejection against an unfamiliar, low score, unpublished author because the true information must come from a trustworthy source. This condition for the validity of information has already been described in the first century: "Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?'' John 1:46. But this self-protection instinct is abnormal for scientific journals; they are the Enterprises of Truth Making with the duty to deal fairly with such unacknowledged, "dirty'', unknown authors. Hollywood is the star-making factory, and the journal is the truth-making factory.
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Policy said:
Meh.
Click to expand...

In general as I experience it, people
questfortruth said:
It is natural for ordinary persons to feel distrust and rejection against an
unfamiliar, low score, unpublished author because the true information must
come from a trustful source. This condition for the validity of information has
already been described in the first century: "Nazareth! Can anything
good come from there?'' John 1:46. But this self-protection instinct is abnormal for
scientific journals; they are the Enterprises of Truth Making with the
duty to deal fairly with such unacknowledged, "dirty'', unknown authors.
Hollywood is the star-making factory, and the journal is the truth
making factory.
Click to expand...

Well, I am skeptic about truth as you use it in the end.
Your claim is this: "I can think X and thus that you can think differently, is wrong". The problem that doesn't stop me or other humans thinking differently than you. You can in effect observe in any of your threads. The falsification of your truth is that other people can do it differently. It is that simple.
 
questfortruth

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
Your claim is this: "I can think X and thus that you can think differently, is wrong". The problem that doesn't stop me or other humans thinking differently than you.
Click to expand...

Indeed, this makes perfect sense because no country has a civil law like 2+2 is 4. Anybody has free speech freedom to say 2+2 is 5. It is only a rare case when the Nihilism gets a liar into jail.
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
questfortruth said:
Indeed, this makes perfect sense because no country has a civil law like 2+2 is 4. Anybody has free speech freedom to say 2+2 is 5. It is only a rare case when the Nihilism gets a liar into jail.
Click to expand...

Well, I am not a nihilist. I am a skeptic, that is different.
But if you want really what to play that game, then okay.

I am a real Nihilist as I am really truly existing as pure nothing. Non-existence exists. That is how pure I am. Btw that is a reductio ad absurdum, but that requires you accept that in some case a negative is a valid result.
 
questfortruth

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
Well, I am not a nihilist. I am a skeptic, that is different.
But if you want really what to play that game, then okay.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge, Friedrich Nietzsche defines Nihilism as rejecting an obvious truth, like 2+2=4.
It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without reporting mistakes.
Otherwise, it is crazy trolling and bullying, like in the case against Jesus:
"If I said something wrong, show what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth,
why did you strike Me?'' John 18:23.

I have proofs because I was trying to write mathematical proofs, not a
description of how to castrate a cat or something. I explicitly put the word
``proof'' into the text. This proof is unpublished yet, but it is a valid
proof until mistakes are reported. Please do not reply to me in such a
Nihilistic, discriminatory way, saying:

"You have no proof, not because we have a report of mistakes, but because
we do not trust you. We rely only upon famous authors and professors of
mathematics. The well-known scientific problems are not for you. They are for
famous, established authors only."

It is natural for ordinary persons to feel distrust and rejection against an
unfamiliar, low score, unpublished author because the true information
must come from a trustworthy source. This condition for the validity of
information has already been described in the first century:
"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?'' John 1:46. But this
self-protection instinct is abnormal for scientific journals
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
questfortruth said:
To my knowledge, Friedrich Nietzsche defines Nihilism as rejecting an obvious truth, like 2+2=4.
It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without reporting mistakes.
Otherwise, it is crazy trolling and bullying, like in the case against Jesus:
"If I said something wrong, show what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth,
why did you strike Me?'' John 18:23.

I have proofs because I was trying to write mathematical proofs, not a
description of how to castrate a cat or something. I explicitly put the word
``proof'' into the text. This proof is unpublished yet, but it is a valid
proof until mistakes are reported. Please do not reply to me in such a
Nihilistic, discriminatory way, saying:

"You have no proof, not because we have a report of mistakes, but because
we do not trust you. We rely only upon famous authors and professors of
mathematics. The well-known scientific problems are not for you. They are for
famous, established authors only."

It is natural for ordinary persons to feel distrust and rejection against an
unfamiliar, low score, unpublished author because the true information
must come from a trustworthy source. This condition for the validity of
information has already been described in the first century:
"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?'' John 1:46. But this
self-protection instinct is abnormal for scientific journals
Click to expand...

I hope you have a good life and overall cope. :) Goodbye for now. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top