Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Creationists: How exactly did the fall of man change biological organisms?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Job 33:6" data-source="post: 76114284" data-attributes="member: 399299"><p>If this is the case then I wouldn't say that God's derivation of logic is different than our own, but rather only God's application of logic would be. Because God would have vastly more knowledge and awareness than we do and thus would be able to apply premises that we are yet to know.</p><p></p><p>Thank you for helping me with these words.</p><p></p><p>[USER=234799]@Ophiolite[/USER] </p><p></p><p>Let me know if you think this is odd at all. </p><p></p><p>I would think that a quantum physicist that knows how to construct logical arguments could apply logic more effectively or appropriately with respect to quantum physics than perhaps someone who knows how to construct logical arguments who isn't a quantum physicist, not because the two people create logical arguments in different ways, but rather because their premises would presumably be constructed based on what they know about the topic of discussion. Whereas the non-physicist would be more prone to errors due to a lack of awareness.</p><p></p><p> But if both of these people created their logical arguments completely independent of one another, the non-physicist wouldn't necessarily know if they had made errors if they didn't have the information necessary to be aware of their shortcomings. </p><p></p><p>Example:</p><p>A particle is fired out of a machine, the photon passes through two slits at the same time, rather than one slit. </p><p></p><p>A logical premise is constructed for the photon in which we conclude that the photon functions as a wave.</p><p></p><p>With that in mind, a further conclusion is made in which the same photon would function as a wave when measured passing through the slit.</p><p></p><p>But alas, the logical conclusion doesn't hold true, as the photon then acts as a particle and only passes through one slit when observed.</p><p></p><p>Hence the creation of quantum logic.</p><p></p><p>But would someone unaware of quantum mechanics ever intuitively conclude realities of quantum logic? No. Because they haven't experienced it and don't know what they don't know.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Job 33:6, post: 76114284, member: 399299"] If this is the case then I wouldn't say that God's derivation of logic is different than our own, but rather only God's application of logic would be. Because God would have vastly more knowledge and awareness than we do and thus would be able to apply premises that we are yet to know. Thank you for helping me with these words. [USER=234799]@Ophiolite[/USER] Let me know if you think this is odd at all. I would think that a quantum physicist that knows how to construct logical arguments could apply logic more effectively or appropriately with respect to quantum physics than perhaps someone who knows how to construct logical arguments who isn't a quantum physicist, not because the two people create logical arguments in different ways, but rather because their premises would presumably be constructed based on what they know about the topic of discussion. Whereas the non-physicist would be more prone to errors due to a lack of awareness. But if both of these people created their logical arguments completely independent of one another, the non-physicist wouldn't necessarily know if they had made errors if they didn't have the information necessary to be aware of their shortcomings. Example: A particle is fired out of a machine, the photon passes through two slits at the same time, rather than one slit. A logical premise is constructed for the photon in which we conclude that the photon functions as a wave. With that in mind, a further conclusion is made in which the same photon would function as a wave when measured passing through the slit. But alas, the logical conclusion doesn't hold true, as the photon then acts as a particle and only passes through one slit when observed. Hence the creation of quantum logic. But would someone unaware of quantum mechanics ever intuitively conclude realities of quantum logic? No. Because they haven't experienced it and don't know what they don't know. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Creationists: How exactly did the fall of man change biological organisms?
Top
Bottom