Thank God he didn't allow his challenge to weigh him down.The wickedness of man is inexplicable.

LordReed:


Can you just answer the question, how did you confirm that your logical sense was correct and real.

How does one confirm that ones logical sense is correct that and real that a man cannot eat up one bag of rice?
Must one attempt trying to eat a bag of rice to make a correct logical conclusion?

How does one confirm that ones logical sense is correct that and real that a foundation designed for a bungalow cannot carry a 35 storey building structure?
Must one attempt building the actual structure until failure to make a correct logical conclusion?

How did you confirm that your logical sense was correct and real in the above scenarios?

What am I getting at?
The fact that something makes logical sense does not imply that a PHYSICAL PROOF has been presented. The important criteria is that IT AGREES WITH COMMON SENSE and PROJECTIONS from known facts about similar things.

Is a human being similar to an advanced AI robot? YES
Is it feasible to have AI robots that doesn't have computer programs written to set their behaviours? NO
Are computer programs within an advanced AI robot tangible/physical? NO
Is it absurd that a human being has some form of advanced AI computer program running him? NO

Those who understand the above call this apparent SOFTWARE PROGRAM the SOUL/SPIRIT of man.
This is an example of how logical deductions are made.

TenQ:

How does one confirm that ones logical sense is correct that and real that a man cannot eat up one bag of rice?
Must one attempt trying to eat a bag of rice to make a correct logical conclusion?

How does one confirm that ones logical sense is correct that and real that a foundation designed for a bungalow cannot carry a 35 storey building structure?
Must one attempt building the actual structure until failure to make a correct logical conclusion?

How did you confirm that your logical sense was correct and real in the above scenarios?

What am I getting at?
The fact that something makes logical sense does not imply that a PHYSICAL PROOF has been presented. The important criteria is that IT AGREES WITH COMMON SENSE and PROJECTIONS from known facts about similar things.

Is a human being similar to an advanced AI robot? YES
Is it feasible to have AI robots that doesn't have computer programs written to set their behaviours? NO
Are computer programs within an advanced AI robot tangible/physical? NO
Is it absurd that a human being has some form of advanced AI computer program running him? NO

Those who understand the above call this apparent SOFTWARE PROGRAM the SOUL/SPIRIT of man.
This is an example of how logical deductions are made.

This is funny. You keep using analogies where the answer to your question of how to show something is correct is right in front of you. Testing is the answer and of course data. Can a man eat a bag of rice ? No because he has tested that he can't even finish a pot so he know he can't finish a bag. So simpolified the question remains how did you confirm that the things you say are real and correct? How did you test your logical inferences?

LordReed:


This is funny. You keep using analogies where the answer to your question of how to show something is correct is right in front of you. Testing is the answer and of course data. Can a man eat a bag of rice ? No because he has tested that he can't even finish a pot so he know he can't finish a bag. So simpolified the question remains how did you confirm that the things you say are real and correct? How did you test your logical inferences?

Since the man did not attempt eating a BAG of rice, he has no empirical physical evidence. He is just making a LOGICAL projection that if a man cannot finish eating a big bowl of rice, then he wouldn't be able to finish eating a bag of rice.

In other words, my analogies stand.

The fact that something makes logical sense does not imply that a PHYSICAL PROOF has been presented. The important criteria is that IT AGREES WITH COMMON SENSE and PROJECTIONS from known facts about similar things.

TenQ:

Since the man did not attempt eating a BAG of rice, he has no empirical physical evidence. He is just making a LOGICAL projection that if a man cannot finish eating a big bowl of rice, then he wouldn't be able to finish eating a bag of rice.

In other words, my analogies stand.

The fact that something makes logical sense does not imply that a PHYSICAL PROOF has been presented. The important criteria is that IT AGREES WITH COMMON SENSE and PROJECTIONS from known facts about similar things.

I am not asking you about analogies I am asking how you confirmed that this spirit/soul you claim exists is actually real.

LordReed:


I am not asking you about analogies I am asking how you confirmed that this spirit/soul you claim exists is actually real.

If you like repeat yourself like a broken gramophone record. I have answered you!
It makes LOGICAL sense to me, if you need proof of logic, I can only give you WHY it makes Logical sense to me and I have.

Is a human being similar to a mechanical CLOCK or an Advanced AI ROBOT?

TenQ:

If you like repeat yourself like a broken gramophone record. I have answered you!
It makes LOGICAL sense to me, if you need proof of logic, I can only give you WHY it makes Logical sense to me and I have.

Is a human being similar to a mechanical CLOCK or an Advanced AI ROBOT?

Then you simply believe it by faith. You have not confirmed it is real except in your mind. That is what faith is.

LordReed:


Then you simply believe it by faith. You have not confirmed it is real except in your mind. That is what faith is.

Faith! ! ! ? ? ?
LOL!!!

When did LOGIC become FAITH?
When did BELIEVING become FAITH?

Did you become an Atheist by LOGIC or by EVIDENCE?
What is your Evidence for becoming an ATHEIST?

Did you simply believed to become an atheist? ? ?

TenQ:

Faith! ! ! ? ? ?
LOL!!!

When did LOGIC become FAITH?
When did BELIEVING become FAITH?

Did you become an Atheist by LOGIC or by EVIDENCE?
What is your Evidence for becoming an ATHEIST?

Did you simply believed to become an atheist? ? ?

Logic is performed in the mind, you have shown no substantive way that you confirmed that what is your mind is real and true. It is purely in your mind hence faith.

I became an atheist because the evidence showed that a god as I then believed did not exist. Either the god has different properties or it outright doesn't exist, in either case I have no good or sufficient evidence to continue to believe in a god.

The evidence was the volume of human suffering. If we merely take all that we have observed in recorded history, the wars, plagues, famines, natural disasters, epidemics and so on, it represents a volume of suffering that to any sentient being world be incomprehensible and devastatingly mind blowing. Yet I believed there was a god watching all of this take place with no attempt to plainly intervene, while calling this god all good and all powerful. I now asked myself if I was someone who did not believe in this god and was told that this world with all its suffering was the work of an all good and all powerful god would I believe. My sincere answer was no I would not believe it because the evidence doesn't show that such a god could possibly exist. From that moment I became an atheist.

I don't need to believe anything to be an atheist, I lack belief in any god or gods of any kind. Simple.

LordReed:


Logic is performed in the mind, you have shown no substantive way that you confirmed that what is your mind is real and true. It is purely in your mind hence faith.

So, according to LordReed, LOGIC is FAITH! SMH!!

LordReed:

I became an atheist because the evidence showed that a god as I then believed did not exist. Either the god has different properties or it outright doesn't exist, in either case I have no good or sufficient evidence to continue to believe in a god.

But you actually didn't show any evidence!
A proper evidence should be PHYSICAL isn't it
Then,
For once, you showed that you are actually really not an atheist but an Agnostics. You have no reasonable conclusive answer of any certainty if God exist or not.
Of cause, God has an outrightly different Property (He is a Spirit) and God is certainly not Physical

Yes, you have no good or sufficient evidence to continue to believe in a god NEITHER do you have any evidence to the contrary.

LordReed:

The evidence was the volume of human suffering. If we merely take all that we have observed in recorded history, the wars, plagues, famines, natural disasters, epidemics and so on, it represents a volume of suffering that to any sentient being world be incomprehensible and devastatingly mind blowing. Yet I believed there was a god watching all of this take place with no attempt to plainly intervene, while calling this god all good and all powerful. I now asked myself if I was someone who did not believe in this god and was told that this world with all its suffering was the work of an all good and all powerful god would I believe. My sincere answer was no I would not believe it because the evidence doesn't show that such a god could possibly exist. From that moment I became an atheist.

Unfortunately, what you call "evidence" is no evidence.
It's very similar to concluding that Nigeria do not have any President Buhari simply because there seem to be so much suffering of Nigerian citizens.

LordReed:

I don't need to believe anything to be an atheist, I lack belief in any god or gods of any kind. Simple.

This statement is merely self consolation.
Why?
If the above is true, why then are you ALWAYS on the Religious section of Nairaland.
Do you think it makes sense for me as a Christian to make it my life's purpose to discredit the existence of Amadioha, Ogun and Osun goddess.
Why should I be passionate about arguing with people who believe in the reality of Spiderman or Superman except if I secretly truly HOPE and WISH these so-called superheroes don't exist

TenQ:

So, according to LordReed, LOGIC is FAITH! SMH!!

I did not write that anywhere so I don't know how you arrived at that.

But you actually didn't show any evidence!
A proper evidence should be PHYSICAL isn't it
Then,
For once, you showed that you are actually really not an atheist but an Agnostics. You have no reasonable conclusive answer of any certainty if God exist or not.
Of cause, God has an outrightly different Property (He is a Spirit) and God is certainly not Physical

Yes, you have no good or sufficient evidence to continue to believe in a god NEITHER do you have any evidence to the contrary.

Unfortunately, what you call "evidence" is no evidence.
It's very similar to concluding that Nigeria do not have any President Buhari simply because there seem to be so much suffering of Nigerian citizens.

LMFAO! There records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are not physical evidence? Bwahahahaha! So what are written documents? Immaterial spirits? LMFAO!

I have no evidence for a god so I have no reason to believe in a god. I am an atheist, you don't need to accept my label it's not your concern what I call myself, just like I don't care what you call yourself.

This statement is merely self consolation.
Why?
If the above is true, why then are you ALWAYS on the Religious section of Nairaland.
Do you think it makes sense for me as a Christian to make it my life's purpose to discredit the existence of Amadioha, Ogun and Osun goddess.
Why should I be passionate about arguing with people who believe in the reality of Spiderman or Superman except if I secretly truly HOPE and WISH these so-called superheroes don't exist

Look up the meaning of atheist.

I enjoy talking about certain subjects that are usually found in the religion section. I would much rather prefer if Nairaland had a philosophy section then I would hang out more frequently there but as it is there isn't one so all such topics are lumped under religion. BTW this topic is not in the religion section is it?

You can make anything your life's purpose why would that concern me?

I am not arguing with you about the existence of your god. I asked you to tell me how you confirmed the existence of spirit/soul.

LordReed:


I did not write that anywhere so I don't know how you arrived at that.

You said:

LordReed:

Logic is performed in the mind, you have shown no substantive way that you confirmed that what is your mind is real and true. It is purely in your mind hence faith.

In other words because I have a LOGICAL DEDUCTION (which is of course of the mind) to justify my position of the existence of the Soul by comparing it as an equivalence of a SOFTWARE, your conclusion is that it is purely of my mind hence FAITH.

Hence, you have simply said that any logical deduction is Faith!

LordReed:

LMFAO! There records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are not physical evidence? Bwahahahaha! So what are written documents? Immaterial spirits? LMFAO!

Now, if I use the same standard for you, you will begin screaming.
How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is YOU
How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is CONSCIOUSNESS
How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is CREATION
How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is that the PHYSICAL must be CAUSED (there is no perpetual existence of the Universe)

The records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are physical evidence that
1. Humans exist, the sometimes fight amongst themselves, they sometimes go hungry, they fall sick and the DOCUMENT these events

LordReed:

I have no evidence for a god so I have no reason to believe in a god. I am an atheist, you don't need to accept my label it's not your concern what I call myself, just like I don't care what you call yourself.

How can you prove that the converse:
If God is a Spirit, what evidence would be sufficient to prove or disprove Him?
If God is Physical, what evidence would be sufficient to prove or disprove Him?

LordReed:

Look up the meaning of atheist.

I enjoy talking about certain subjects that are usually found in the religion section. I would much rather prefer if Nairaland had a philosophy section then I would hang out more frequently there but as it is there isn't one so all such topics are lumped under religion. BTW this topic is not in the religion section is it?

You can make anything your life's purpose why would that concern me?

I am not arguing with you about the existence of your god. I asked you to tell me how you confirmed the existence of spirit/soul.

You brought in the issue of God. We were talking about the Soul/Spirit of man

Let me ask you a sincere question:
Is it implausible that physical living beings are run by some kind of software?

TenQ:

You said:

In other words because I have a LOGICAL DEDUCTION (which is of course of the mind) to justify my position of the existence of the Soul by comparing it as an equivalence of a SOFTWARE, your conclusion is that it is purely of my mind hence FAITH.

Hence, you have simply said that any logical deduction is Faith!

No, the implication is not that all logic is faith, rather if the only reason you think something true or real is because it is logical then you are believing so by faith. Logic is not evidence of the reality or truthfulness of a thing.

Now, if I use the same standard for you, you will begin screaming.
How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is YOU
How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is CONSCIOUSNESS
How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is CREATION

Well then you'll have to prove that any of these are correct.

How about if I tell you that the Evidence of God is that the PHYSICAL must be CAUSED (there is no perpetual existence of the Universe)

Says who? Why can't the universe have always existed?

The records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are physical evidence that
1. Humans exist, the sometimes fight amongst themselves, they sometimes go hungry, they fall sick and the DOCUMENT these events

Exactly! They are proof that no god is intervening in the affairs of men which directly contradicts the properties of the bible god.

How can you prove that the converse:
If God is a Spirit, what evidence would be sufficient to prove or disprove Him?
If God is Physical, what evidence would be sufficient to prove or disprove Him?

I don't know what a spirit is so I can't say anything about that. If there is a god that is physical we must first know what properties it has before we can investigate it. If you care to list properties a physical god has I can venture some ways we can test if such a god exists.

You brought in the issue of God. We were talking about the Soul/Spirit of man

You asked me why or how I became an atheist. I am not arguing the existence of a god with you but if you want to dispute my atheist position that's great I am happy to oblige you.

Let me ask you a sincere question:
Is it implausible that physical living beings are run by some kind of software?

Yes it is implausible because we are not that kind of machine. "Biological machines" don't run on software, they run by reason of interconnected physical systems which can sometimes give rise to emergent properties.

LordReed:

No, the implication is not that all logic is faith, rather if the only reason you think something true or real is because it is logical then you are believing so by faith. Logic is not evidence of the reality or truthfulness of a thing.

Can you solve any arithmetic addition between any two arbitrary whole numbers?
Of course, the answer is YES.
Have you solved ALL possible arithmetic addition of integers before?
NO, you havent.
So, how do you KNOW that you can solve any arithmetic addition between any two arbitrary whole numbers?
LOGIC SAYS:
The rules of mathematics are invariable, thus if you can use the rules of mathematics to correctly solve problems of additions, then the same rule will help you solve any future arithmetic addition problems.

Can we say the statement of Logic above is not evidence of the reality or truthfulness of the answer to the question.

LordReed:

Well then you'll have to prove that any of these are correct.

Well then you'll have to prove that your statement below is correct
The records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are not physical evidence prove that God doesn't exist

LordReed:

Says who? Why can't the universe have always existed?

The inflation theory (update of Big babg theory) proves otherwise. The age of the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years.
Thus the universe has a beginning

LordReed:

Exactly! They are proof that no god is intervening in the affairs of men which directly contradicts the properties of the bible god.

If you want to use the Bible God as your example, then, you'll have to ask yourself the question
1. In the Bible, even in Israel, does God ALWAYS interfere with nature?
2. In the bible, has there been EarthQuakes, Wars, Famines, Disasters etc on the earth?

How then is today different?

LordReed:

I don't know what a spirit is so I can't say anything about that. If there is a god that is physical we must first know what properties it has before we can investigate it. If you care to list properties a physical god has I can venture some ways we can test if such a god exists.

Unfortunately, the God of the Bible has never been described as a PHYSICAL BEING.
God is a Spirit.

A Spirit is any Conscious Being with no material Body.

Shutting out your mind on this possibility does not change anything

LordReed:

You asked me why or how I became an atheist. I am not arguing the existence of a god with you but if you want to dispute my atheist position that's great I am happy to oblige you.

Yes it is implausible because we are not that kind of machine. "Biological machines" don't run on software, they run by reason of interconnected physical systems which can sometimes give rise to emergent properties.

Now, since you have concluded that man is more akin to a mechanical CLOCK than an Advanced AI robot, then its a waste of time.

Don't forget that Object oriented programming is an attempt to clone how humans reason to computer programming:
Polymorphism,
Encapsulation,
Data Abstraction and
Inheritance

TenQ:

Can you solve any arithmetic addition between any two arbitrary whole numbers?
Of course, the answer is YES.
Have you solved ALL possible arithmetic addition of integers before?
NO, you havent.
So, how do you KNOW that you can solve any arithmetic addition between any two arbitrary whole numbers?
LOGIC SAYS:
The rules of mathematics are invariable, thus if you can use the rules of mathematics to correctly solve problems of additions, then the same rule will help you solve any future arithmetic addition problems.

Can we say the statement of Logic above is not evidence of the reality or truthfulness of the answer to the question.

I have never seen a math textbook that gives you theorems without giving you problems to solve with the theorems. They do that so you can test for yourself that the theorems hold true, they don't expect you to believe the theorems are true just because it is logical.

Well then you'll have to prove that your statement below is correct
The records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are not physical evidence prove that God doesn't exist

That is not a statement I made.

The inflation theory (update of Big babg theory) proves otherwise. The age of the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years.
Thus the universe has a beginning

The BBT says the universe expanded from a singularity, it doesn't say nothing existed before the BB happened. The singularity could have been existing forever before the BB, we have no way of knowing for now.

If you want to use the Bible God as your example, then, you'll have to ask yourself the question
1. In the Bible, even in Israel, does God ALWAYS interfere with nature?
2. In the bible, has there been EarthQuakes, Wars, Famines, Disasters etc on the earth?

How then is today different?

The bible god saved Israelites from slavery it says in the bible yet in WW2 6million of them were killed, what was he looking at? Why did he not intervene to save them?

Unfortunately, the God of the Bible has never been described as a PHYSICAL BEING.
God is a Spirit.

A Spirit is any Conscious Being with no material Body.

Shutting out your mind on this possibility does not change anything

You asked me how to prove a physical god so blame yourself for the question.

Do these beings without material bodies have any attributes that we can test?

Now, since you have concluded that man is more akin to a mechanical CLOCK than an Advanced AI robot, then its a waste of time.

Don't forget that Object oriented programming is an attempt to clone how humans reason to computer programming:
Polymorphism,
Encapsulation,
Data Abstraction and
Inheritance

Well sorry (not!) to burst your bubble.

TenQ:

.

You should watch this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYtuNM45aT8

LordReed:


I have never seen a math textbook that gives you theorems without giving you problems to solve with the theorems. They do that so you can test for yourself that the theorems hold true, they don't expect you to believe the theorems are true just because it is logical.

My point is that you have not solved every arithmetic problems possible (eg. 24358976453+9763452319), yet you certainly KNOW that you can solve the problem correctly.
You know that you can solve the problem, not through evidence which would have been that you have solved the problem (24358976453+9763452319) before BUT by a simple LOGIC that arithmetic theories are invariant

LordReed:

That is not a statement I made.

Here was what you said

LordReed:

LMFAO! There records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are not physical evidence? Bwahahahaha! So what are written documents? Immaterial spirits? LMFAO!

How is it different from

Well then you'll have to prove that your statement below is correct
The records of all the wars, famines, epidemics, natural disasters are not physical evidence prove that God doesn't exist

LordReed:

The BBT says the universe expanded from a singularity, it doesn't say nothing existed before the BB happened. The singularity could have been existing forever before the BB, we have no way of knowing for now.

A singularity is an abstract concept. There is not a single evidence of anything similar in existence.
And of course, the singularity is NOT the universe.

LordReed:

The bible god saved Israelites from slavery it says in the bible yet in WW2 6million of them were killed, what was he looking at? Why did he not intervene to save them?

And you haven't read that
1. Famine affected Israel several times within their existence at bible times
2. The Israelites went into slavery several times within their existence at bible times from in Assyria, Babylon, Edom, etc
3. Israel had its fair share of civil wars (eg Absalom and David, breaking of Israel into the Northern and Southern kingdom

LordReed:

You asked me how to prove a physical god so blame yourself for the question.
Do these beings without material bodies have any attributes that we can test?

No sir, we have no single instrument with which you can TEST their attributes, any interaction or a person have with hem is usually subjective. My experience cannot help you.

LordReed:

Well sorry (not!) to burst your bubble.

Since you have concluded that man is more akin to a mechanical CLOCK than an Advanced AI robot, then its a waste of time discussing this with you

TenQ:


Since you have concluded that man is more akin to a mechanical CLOCK than an Advanced AI robot, then its a waste of time discussing this with you

Well then I shall not waste any more of your time. Adios amigo.

LordReed:


Well then I shall not waste any more of your time. Adios amigo.

Thanks for concurring

Benrosaria:



Was it known to everyone that while the incidence was happening, he must have screamed and no one could help

Who dares come out to a robbery scene?

sonsomegrigbo:


Who dares come out to a robbery scene?

Why should anyone think of robbery ??
It’s deeply sad what this world turns into on a daily