Presuppositions

[bricklayer]

Do all material sciences presuppose material necessity?

Do all material sciences presuppose independent trials?

Do all sciences presuppose objectivity (as opposed to necessity or contingency)?

 

[Naraoia]

What do these questions mean?

 

[bricklayer]

Do all the physical sciences assume that matter exists necessarily, as to contingently?
Do all the physical sciences assume that there is an objective perspective, as opposed to necessary or contingent?

I'm left to believe that God is necessary and everything else is contingent.
This does not appear to leave anyone to occupy an objective position.

I do not believe in independent trials or material necessity.

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

so... your essentially setting up your latest rationalisation why science must be wrong and your particular blend of holy book is the truth? go for it.

 

[bricklayer]

I'm not begging anything.
I sincerely want to know.

All reasoning is presuppositional.
I want to know the presuppositions held by the majority.

Are the above presuppositions generally held?

As I follow their reasoning back, to the best of my abilities, I arrive at the above presuppositions.

 

[Maxwell511]

I'm left to believe that God is necessary and everything else is contingent.

If God is necessary surely you should be able to show it without reference to anything that maybe be contingent.

I assume you don't believe matter is necessary and therefore why do you need to ask about it. Just show us that God is necessary.

The fact of the matter is that all of the things we attribute to God necessitate the existence of other things. If God's omnipresence it is necessary that places exist, if God is omniscience it is necessary that things to have knowledge about exist, if God is benevolent it is necessary that those to be benevolent to exist. The universe is necessary for God's existence. This relationship is not commutative.

 

[bricklayer]

The finite cannot express the infinite. (analogy principle)

Given the observable operation of the universe, not theorectical but demonstrable, I am left to believe that entropy increases, that the universe is not an open or necessary system. This begs a efficient cause.

I have no reason to believe that available complexity, information or energy spontaneously increases. It has never been observed.
I am left to believe that the whole universe is "flowing" in the opposite direction.
I am left to believe that it is "dying", "winding down".

Granted, my understanding is contingent to what I know, and I know only in part. I am not objective, I am contingent.

I cannot point to any thing as proof of anything.
Nothing has ever really ever been proven to me.
it's just that all the other ideas that I've considered have been des-proven,
and what remains is my faith; and then that's tested ....
In that sense, I've an open mind.

 

[sk8Joyful]

All reasoning is presuppositional.

except of course, God's reasoning

I want to know, the presuppositions held by the majority.

How do you expect their Limited-beliefs could help you?

As I follow their reasoning back, to the best of my abilities, I arrive at the above presuppositions.

Why keep endlessly looping, back to square one?

When you could be making progress...

I sincerely want to know.

Fantastic! What? blessed & new-to-you awarenesses do you want to gain now

 

[Maxwell511]

The finite cannot express the infinite. (analogy principle)

I have existed for an infinite amount of infinitesimal times, I have existed in an infinite amount of infinitesimal places. So have you.

 

[bricklayer]

Quite to the contrary, dear friend;
all of God's ideas are presuppositions.

God has no sequence of ideas. He does not come to know anything.

What God knows He know necessarily.

What we know we know contingently.

All of God's ideas are presuppositions.

All reasoning is just presupposition extrpolated.
Even sound reasoning is just presupposition extrpolated logically,
even God's reasoning.

 

[sfs]

Do all the physical sciences assume that matter exists necessarily, as to contingently?

No, the physical sciences make no such assumptions. "Necessary" and "contingent" are concepts developed by some philosophers; their scientific content appears to be nil.

Do all the physical sciences assume that there is an objective perspective, as opposed to necessary or contingent?

I have no idea how an objective perspective could be considered an alternative to a necessary or contingent one, or what a necessary perspective would be, but no, science does not require any particular assumptions about the existence of an objective perspective.

 

[USincognito]

I'd be a lot more impressed if people who wished to tackle an area of science would simply tackle that are of science and stop with the hypotheticals, syllogisms and semantics.

Bricklayer, the genetic data and the fossils are readily availible for you to analyze and critique. No need for hypotheticals, syllogisms, semantics or philosophy.

 

[3sigma]

Nothing has ever really ever been proven to me.
it's just that all the other ideas that I've considered have been des-proven,
and what remains is my faith; and then that's tested ....
In that sense, I've an open mind.

So your mode of reasoning is to believe ideas until they are disproven. That isn’t open-mindedness; it’s credulity.

 

[sk8Joyful]

Quite to the contrary, dear friend;
all of God's ideas are presuppositions.

God has no sequence of ideas. He does not come to know anything.

What God knows He know necessarily.

What we know we know contingently.

All of God's ideas are presuppositions.

All reasoning is just presupposition extrpolated.
Even sound reasoning is just presupposition extrpolated logically,
even God's reasoning.

Hi Bricklayer,

Since you claim to know, self-assuredly, EVERYthing about God;
why? do you need to ask a medical-doc.
what your Testosterone, & Thyroid-levels are.
Surely, those are much easier to know than is 'God', eh?

 

[Cabal]

I'd be a lot more impressed if people who wished to tackle an area of science would simply tackle that are of science and stop with the hypotheticals, syllogisms and semantics.

Bricklayer, the genetic data and the fossils are readily availible for you to analyze and critique. No need for hypotheticals, syllogisms, semantics or philosophy.

^ This.

And openmindedness is one thing; letting your brain slide out of your open mind is something else.

 

[sandwiches]

Is it just me or is Brickslayer having a conversation with himself?

 

[Cabal]

Is it just me or is Brickslayer having a conversation with himself?

BrickLayer.

I think he's possibly the only one that knows what he's on about, methinks.

 

[SithDoughnut]

^ This.

And openmindedness is one thing; letting your brain slide out of your open mind is something else.

"I used to have an open mind but my brain kept falling out"

 

[Tinker Grey]

If all of God's ideas are presuppositions, where did he get them from?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

This thread makes me think I'm in Wonderland.