It is time for us athiests to stand up for ourselves.

[Doreen]

This is for mathematics. However I found this - Gödel was a convinced theist. He rejected the notion that God was impersonal. He believed firmly in an afterlife, stating: “I am convinced of the afterlife, independent of theology. If the world is rationally constructed, there must be an afterlife."[16] He said about Islam: “I like Islam: it is a consistent [or consequential] idea of religion and open-minded."[17]

You see geniuses can be believers in God, let alone Islam.

There are all sorts of non-math things that cannot be proven true or false.

Whether we are in a simulation or not.
Whether memory is to some degree accurate.
Whether there are other minds or not. IOW solipsism.

 

[-ND-]

Do you thank a God who tortures people for eternity is merciful or a monster.???

He made everyone the same. If you hurt another human being with your intentions why should he forgive you? Is someone who is evil the same as someone who is kind. Please don't ask supid questions. Are inmates treated the same as people that live in their homes? Answer to your questions has nothing to do with merciful or monster, it has to do with being Fair and Just.

Didnt God alone... create the circumatances which makes it inevitable that people will wind up in hell.???

"God does not change what any people may have
until they change whatever they themselves have."- Quran

An yet... mos babys that make it to adult-hood will wind up in hell... so shudnt a lovin parent kill ther children to gurantee heaven for ther children.???

LOL! Are you serious? Where do you live? Wizard of Oz?

Its oK... lol... its all part of Gods plan that hell will be overflowin wit soopid people who lack understandin :thumbsup:

God, gave Hades to Satan for keeps. All souls that go to Hades will be kept by Satan, overwatched by God.

"Conjecture will not help out in any way against the Truth, so shun anyone who avoids mentioning Us and only wants [to enjoy] worldly life; that will be their range of knowledge."-Quran You really believe that you live for no absolute reason, what an unreasonable folk you are.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Yo, if you are responding to me, I was agreeing wit ya.

Nah, that was a reply to -ND-, you skipped in while I was typing.


Re -ND-'s edit and added comment:

He rejected the notion that God was impersonal. He believed firmly in an afterlife, stating: “I am convinced of the afterlife, independent of theology. If the world is rationally constructed, there must be an afterlife."[16] He said about Islam: “I like Islam: it is a consistent [or consequential] idea of religion and open-minded."[17]
You see geniuses can be believers in God, let alone Islam.

So what?
Given the history of the world and the grip of religion throughout history it's not surprising.
Geniuses can be atheists, theists, axe murderers, firm believers in astrology or dog-breeders for example.
Simply because someone shows a genuine and remarkable talent in one (or, more rarely, more) particular field does not in any way stop them being subject to human foibles.

 

[-ND-]

We were talking about: Theists, Atheists, and Undecided. I don't see how Godel has anything to do with this.

 

[-ND-]

There are all sorts of non-math things that cannot be proven true or false.

Whether we are in a simulation or not.
Whether memory is to some degree accurate.
Whether there are other minds or not. IOW solipsism.

Exactly, only in the end of time they will be proven false or true.

 

[-ND-]

Nah, that was a reply to -ND-, you skipped in while I was typing.


Re -ND-'s edit and added comment:

So what?
Given the history of the world and the grip of religion throughout history it's not surprising.
Geniuses can be atheists, theists, axe murderers, firm believers in astrology or dog-breeders for example.
Simply because someone shows a genuine and remarkable talent in one (or, more rarely, more) particular field does not in any way stop them being subject to human foibles.

I was just saying lol. Geeze you think I don't know that. What do you think I have been arguing about this whole time on the forums. Before someone was a genius, killer, singer, actor, scientist, believer, etc he was a human being.

 

[Dywyddyr]

We were talking about: Theists, Atheists, and Undecided. I don't see how Godel has anything to do with this.

Exactly, only in the end of time they will be proven false or true.

That is exactly what Gödel has to do with it: not everything will be proven true or false.

I was just saying lol. Geeze you think I don't know that. What do you think I have been arguing about this whole time on the forums. Before someone was a genius, killer, singer, actor, scientist, believer, etc he was a human being.

So why bring it up?

 

[lixluke]

OK, I understand that.

Are you saying that A, B, and C are all the same? Do they all lead to the same point at the end of time? Are, A, B, and C (these options) rellevent at all in the end, or irellevent? Is there any wrong or right? A=wrong B=right C= delayed but eventually will be wrong or right?

1. A, B, and C are not the same.
2. A, B, and C have no relevance to whether or not the proposition in question is true or false.
3. Wrong or right depends on the subject's position and whether or not that position coincides with the actual state of the proposition.

 

[-ND-]

That is exactly what Gödel has to do with it: not everything will be proven true or false.


So why bring it up?

LOL, you know we are talking about beliefs right? You would apply that to beliefs? If not everything is proven true or false, that means there is a gap. A gap where the unexplained goes?

I thought it was kinda cool, that is why.

 

[Doreen]

Exactly, only in the end of time they will be proven false or true.

I suppose I can't rule that out, but I am not sure why the end of time is suddenly coming into the conversation.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

That is some satanic worshipping idol. It would be an error to believe in such because that creature does not answer back.

O yes... an to counter-act that type of evel magic... its my understandin that one shud stan on 1 foot an swang a dead cat in the air while cluckin like a chicken :runaway:

 

[lixluke]

This proposition is false.
Two parallel lines never intersect.
One should always try to understand the other person's position.
I could not control myself.
Sentences contain truths.

For various reasons I think the above sentences are neither true nor false.

None of those statements contradict the facts presented.

Which does not alter the fact that there are things which are inherently undecidable.
And bearing in mind that mathematics is far more rigorous than "real life" what makes you think everything in the "real world" has to be true or false only?

WTF? There is no such thing as inherently undecidable. Decisions are wholly at the discretion of the subject. It doesn't matter what the proposition, the subject can fall under A, B, or C. Any of them regarding all propositions.

 

[Dywyddyr]

LOL, you know we are talking about beliefs right? You would apply that to beliefs? If not everything is proven true or false, that means there is a gap. A gap where the unexplained goes?

A gap?
Nope, it just means that reality is a continuum, not a pair of diametrically opposed, digital, either/ or states.

 

[-ND-]

1. A, B, and C are not the same.
2. A, B, and C have no relevance to whether or not the proposition in question is true or false.
3. Wrong or right depends on the subject's position and whether or not that position coincides with the actual state of the proposition.

OK, I think im getting close to understanding your point. There is A, B, and C. You compare these variables with X and Y. X= Truth and Y=Lie?

A, B, and C, can be compared with each other but their main comparison is for X and Y?

 

[Dywyddyr]

WTF? There is no such thing as inherently undecidable.

I see.
So you didn't bother to read any of the links, you just went to stating your opinion as if it were incontrovertible fact. Again.

Decisions are wholly at the discretion of the subject. It doesn't matter what the proposition, the subject can fall under A, B, or C. Any of them regarding all propositions.

And C is an illustration of the inherently undecidable...

 

[-ND-]

I suppose I can't rule that out, but I am not sure why the end of time is suddenly coming into the conversation.

Well, because I am not trying to offend any atheists and call human beings, things that have souls. Souls=infinite (that means you believe in God) No souls= end is death( no belief in God time has limit)

 

[lixluke]

OK, I think im getting close to understanding your point. There is A, B, and C. You compare these variables with X and Y. X= Truth and Y=Lie?

A, B, and C, can be compared with each other but their main comparison is for X and Y?

A, B, and C are the 3 possible perspectives a subject possesses regarding a t/f proposition.

A proposition is either true or false.

Perspectives:
Subject A: "I have concluded that the proposition is true!"
Subject B: "I have concluded that the proposition is false!"
Subject C: "I have not concluded whether or not the proposition is true or false!!!!"

Now let's say the proposition is true. Thus, A would be correct, and B would be incorrect.

Now let's sat the proposition is false. Thus, A would be incorrect, and B would be correct.

 

[-ND-]

A gap?
Nope, it just means that reality is a continuum, not a pair of diametrically opposed, digital, either/ or states.

I don't know man. I tried to understand your point, but I found this.

The theorems were proven by Kurt Gödel in 1931, and are important in the philosophy of mathematics. The result is widely interpreted as showing that Hilbert's program to find a complete and consistent set of axioms for all of mathematics is impossible, thus giving a negative answer to Hilbert's second problem.

I got it from here.

 

[lixluke]

I see.
So you didn't bother to read any of the links, you just went to stating your opinion as if it were incontrovertible fact. Again.


And C is an illustration of the inherently undecidable...

'Propositions not being inherently undecidable' is an incontrovertible fact. And C does not make a proposition inherently undecidable. C is simply a possible subject perspective that has no inherent effect on the validity of a proposition.

 

[Dywyddyr]

@ -ND-
Quite: and that's to do with the incompleteness theorem, not the undecidability problems.
See section 4 on the linked page.