Re: Peterson's Death Sentence
From: John Fields (jfields_at_austininstruments.com)
Date: 01/31/05
- Next message: John Fields: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Previous message: Andreas: "Re: DNS resolution speed"
- Maybe in reply to: John Fields: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Next in thread: John Fields: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:35:15 -0600
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 01:52:48 GMT, Parse Tree
<account@domain.extension> wrote:
>Kevin Aylward wrote:
>> John Fields wrote:
>>
>>
>>>---
>>>
>>>
>>>>So, the discussion then turns
>>>>to that part of god which *can* be discussed, and that part of god
>>>>must be bound by logic, and is therefore *not* omnipotent.
>>>
>>>---
>>>If the god is _truly_ omnipotent, then its not being omnipotent must
>>>not be disallowed.
>>
>>
>> Since omnipotent gods leads to a contradiction using our system of laws,
>> to allow for this means *all* of our laws should be false. Without
>> logic, Maxwell's equations shouldn't exist, neither should quantum
>> mechanics, absolutely nothing in science should exist, as it all
>> fundamental depends on basic logical arguments That is, no mathematical
>> derivation is valid if the concept of contradictions is false.
>
>Indeed. While intuitionist mathematics has discarded the law of the
>excluded middle, there is no system of which I'm aware that discards the
>law of noncontradiction.
--- The discussion isn't about systems of which you're aware, it's about systems of which you _can't_ be aware! -- John Fields
- Next message: John Fields: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Previous message: Andreas: "Re: DNS resolution speed"
- Maybe in reply to: John Fields: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Next in thread: John Fields: "Re: Peterson's Death Sentence"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|