I am Immortal because my soul is..

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
1st of all are you Russian? 2nd of all, i hardly see a problem. And 3rd of all, what is you argument?

Make sense the next time, I'm allergic to irrelevance.

[list=1][*]How is whether or not I am Russian relevant to whether or not souls exist?

[*]Since a positive claim can be proved, the inability to substantiate a positive claim results in an argument that is not sound.

Since a negative claim cannot be proved, the inability to substantiate a negative claim does not affect whether or not the argument is sound.

[*]Souls do not exist.[/list]

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
[list=1][*]How is whether or not I am Russian relevant to whether or not souls exist?

[*]Since a positive claim can be proved, the inability to substantiate a positive claim results in an argument that is not sound.

Since a negative claim cannot be proved, the inability to substantiate a negative claim does not affect whether or not the argument is sound.

[*]Souls do not exist.[/list]

I was being humorous. It seems you don't believe that exists either.

However, I'll have you know that such a thing exists as an unproven positive claim that can equally result in arguments of no sound.

Your saying that souls don't exist is merely your opinion. That they do exist is my belief in which I don't consider it opinion.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
I was being humorous. It seems you don't believe that exists either.

humor exists, it merely escapes you

Originally posted by FistOfThe North

Your saying that souls don't exist is merely your opinion. That they do exist is my belief in which I don't consider it opinion.

and yet it is an opinoin

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
However, I'll have you know that such a thing exists as an unproven positive claim that can equally result in arguments of no sound.

Your saying that souls don't exist is merely your opinion. That they do exist is my belief in which I don't consider it opinion.

Again, my inability to prove a negative claim does not affect the soundness of my argument, but your inabilitity to prove a positive claim does affect the soundness of yours. Try again.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Again, my inability to prove a negative claim does not affect the soundness of my argument, but your inabilitity to prove a positive claim does affect the soundness of yours. Try again.

Try to make you understand it again. Sure. I'll try and simplify to make it easier for you, k?

🙂

My belief that I have a soul makes it a fact in itself, to me. And fact is fact. It's definitely not an opinion because my faith tells me that i certainly have a soul because an opinion is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty, while totally killing the soundness of your argument and claim, which is that a soul doesn't exist. So you try again.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Try to make you understand it again. Sure. I'll try and simplify to make it easier for you, k?

🙂

My belief that I have a soul makes it a fact in itself, to me. And fact is fact. It's definitely not an opinion because my faith tells me that i certainly have a soul because an opinion is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty, while totally killing the soundness of your argument and claim, which is that a soul doesn't exist. So you try again.

If it is a fact only to you then no matter how much faith you have it is still an opinion.

For example if a shitzophrenic is convinced that there is arsenic in his coffe that doesn't make it true even if he is absolutely certain.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If it is a fact only to you then no matter how much faith you have it is still an opinion.

For example if a shitzophrenic is convinced that there is arsenic in his coffe that doesn't make it true even if he is absolutely certain.

The thing is, is if the scizophrenc is absolutely certain that there is arsnic in his coffee, who's to say it isn't true and what effects do we have to say he's lying. On top of which, on a hunch and on the contrary, there are millions of schizophrenics who are productive citizens.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
The thing is, is if the scizophrenc is absolutely certain that there is arsnic in his coffee, who's to say it isn't true and what effects do we have to say he's lying. On top of which, on a hunch and on the contrary, there are millions of schizophrenics who are productive citizens.

There certainly could be arsenic in his coffe but the conviction that it is there doesn't make it a factual truth.

I never said the people with schizophrenia were all delusional or nonproductive (hell not all of them even hear voices) I merely used a well known disorder to make the point clearer.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
The thing is, is if the scizophrenc is absolutely certain that there is arsnic in his coffee, who's to say it isn't true and what effects do we have to say he's lying.

Anyone who questions the schizophrenic and determines that there is no rational reason for him to believe that his coffee is poisoned, anyone who observes the coffee and determines that it is not poisoned, etc.

In this case, the schizophrenic is not lying, because he sincerely believes that his coffee is poisoned. However, his belief that his coffee is poisoned is a delusion, it is simply not true.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Anyone who questions the schizophrenic and determines that there is no rational reason for him to believe that his coffee is poisoned, anyone who observes the coffee and determines that it is not poisoned, etc.

In this case, the schizophrenic is not lying, because he sincerely believes that his coffee is poisoned. However, his belief that his coffee is poisoned is a delusion, it is simply not true.

However, it could make him sick if he drank the coffee. The power of belief is amazing.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, it could make him sick if he drank the coffee. The power of belief is amazing.

true but within certain limits

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, it could make him sick if he drank the coffee. The power of belief is amazing.

That does not make his coffee poisoned.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
That does not make his coffee poisoned.

No, his coffee is not poisoned; however, someone who saw him drink it might begin to believe that the coffee is poisoned. A person sees a sick person get better after an exorcism, and then believes that the person was possessed.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, his coffee is not poisoned; however, someone who saw him drink it might begin to believe that the coffee is poisoned. A person sees a sick person get better after an exorcism, and then believes that the person was possessed.

If one determines that the coffee is not poisoned and witnesses the schizophrenic drink the coffee and react as if he is poisoned, he will believe that this behavior is an extention of the delusion of the schizophrenic. The same is true of exorcising the posessed.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If one determines that the coffee is not poisoned and witnesses the schizophrenic drink the coffee and react as if he is poisoned, he will believe that this behavior is an extention of the delusion of the schizophrenic. The same is true of exorcising the posessed.

I never said that the other person knew that the coffee was not poisoned. That would have a different result. I'm trying to illustrate the reason people sometimes come to incorrect conclusions. They listen to what is in their head instead of looking at the information dispassionately. I have come across this over and over again.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I never said that the other person knew that the coffee was not poisoned. That would have a different result. I'm trying to illustrate the reason people sometimes come to incorrect conclusions. They listen to what is in their head instead of looking at the information dispassionately. I have come across this over and over again.

The reason one comes to incorrect conclusions is because he believes that an opinion becomes a fact if he believes it enough.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The reason one comes to incorrect conclusions is because he believes that an opinion becomes a fact if he believes it enough.

What? We are talking past each other.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What? We are talking past each other.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
Try to make you understand it again. Sure. I'll try and simplify to make it easier for you, k?

🙂

My belief that I have a soul makes it a fact in itself, to me. And fact is fact. It's definitely not an opinion because my faith tells me that i certainly have a soul because an opinion is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty, while totally killing the soundness of your argument and claim, which is that a soul doesn't exist. So you try again.

I think this is a symmetric problem if we are analyzing to what extent logic can be used to solve it.

If souls cannot be proved we can´t say that they exist and neither we can say that they do not exist.

Logic is not eliminating any possibility, but it is saying that there is no way to know the answer to the question.

If they can' t be proven, then there is no rational reason to believe they would exist.