14 video series Proving God’s Existence

[Prodigal_Son]

So you are saying this is not an assertion?

It is an assertion of a conditional. Suppose you say:

“If the moon is made of cheese, then I’m a monkey’s uncle.” Have you just asserted that you are a monkey’s uncle? No you have asserted that you are a monkey’s uncle ONLY UNDER A CERTAIN CONDITION (that does not apply).

 

[IWantGod]

Whatever man

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Whatever man

Please take a class on logic, when you get a chance.

 

[IWantGod]

An assertion is an assertion. It doesn’t matter if it is conditional. If i say that i exist and therefore everyone else exists because i exist, at some point in that statement i am making an assertion, basically at the point where i say that everyone exists because of my existence.

It’s obvious!

Also George Mavrodes’s argument is a circular argument, obviously and i provided the link so that you can understand why. I mean, don’t let pride get in your way.

It is not me that needs the classes.

 

[IWantGod]

The fact that they may exist only in my mind doesn’t make them less important,

That you give value to the people in your mind is your own personal prerogative. Don’t let me get in the way.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

It is not me that needs the classes.

I guess that my logic students are very badly served by having me as their professor, then.

 

[IWantGod]

I agree…, but the fact that you’re a professor anyway, i would say that’s an achievement. Teaching philosophy is not necessarily the same as doing philosophy. That’s why i don’t usually respond well to statements of authority.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I mean, don’t let pride get in your way.

Right back at ya, o great philosopher.

 

[IWantGod]

I hope you read the wiki i provided.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Answer yes or no:

When I say, “If God does not exist, then life is meaningless”, am I asserting that life is meaningless? One word answer. Yes or no?

 

[IWantGod]

Until you explain why life is meaningless without God, it is just an assertion.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Until you explain why life is meaningless without God, it is just an assertion.

Is it an assertion that life is meaningless? Yes or no?

 

[IWantGod]

Until you explain why life is meaningless, then yes it is just an assertion.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

yes it is just an assertion.

Of WHAT? All assertions are assertions of something.

 

[IWantGod]

An assertion about life.

 

[IWantGod]

Well, if you really are on the moral high ground, please stay there.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

OK, then try this…

I will gladly say that:

(A) If IWantGod is right, then I am wrong.

Am I asserting that I am wrong? If so, then you should be happy, because I’ve said I’m wrong about the claims I’m making in this conversation. (But of course, my claim A above says nothing of the kind).

 

[IWantGod]

It is correct to say that if i am right, then you are wrong.

You are not asserting that i am right here. It’s conditional. You are say that you are wrong only if i am right.

But there are also situations in which we can both be right about the same thing when that thing is viewed from different aspects. Depending on the nature of the thing discussed. But we cannot be both right in the same way in the same sense.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

You are not asserting that i am right here. It’s conditional. You are say that you are wrong only if i am right.

Exactly.

And that is why “If the world exists, then God exists” is not asserting the existence of God. And since it is not asserting God’s existence, it cannot be a circular argument to conclude from it (and another premise) that God exists.

 

[IWantGod]

“If the world exists, then God exists”

There is an assertion here, because although the statement begins with “if” as a conditional, it goes on to assert that the world existing means that God exists also, and that fact has not been demonstrated yet. It’s an assertion. And to make matters worse the argument ends with the conclusion that God exists becuase the world exists. It’s a circular argument.