Science, Arts, Belief, Right & Wrong...

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
Do you mean creation out of rearrangement of already existing matter or creation out of nothing?

And what does this have to do with following evidence to reach a conclusion?
anything..just give me one example that i know of..which i,by my intuition, will call it creation but sceince/evidence will say the opposite
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Im not putting my weight behind my argument I am just pointing out the mistakes in your reasoning, if you think I am wrong then demonstrate how.

In english language same word can be used in many different context for example the word information can be used in the context of evidence and it can be used in the context of a claim.

Similary light can refer to the weight if something or the illumination. If I say that I am light, and you argue that no your wrong because if you stand in a dark room it will still be dark. Do you see how that is a logical fallacy?



u really love to throw these terms..to put weight in ur argument maybe

let me give example of straight As again
evidence is ur report card period..
information is that i know u i know ur talent etc..
information is sufficient enough for me to believe u
i dont need to see ur report card(evidence) to believe u
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
So here you are trying to make an analogy between a house and a mountain.

You cannot make an analogy between two unrelated things with unrelated properties as it is a logical fallacy known as false analogy.

Let me demonstrate.
1. First you are comparing man made phenomena to natural phenomena. They are not the same.
2. We have witnessed man make houses thats why when we see a house we are confident to say that we created it. No one has ever witnesses a God create a mountain therefore we cannot say with the same level of confidence that the mountain was created. Infact we understand very well the geological process by which mountains are formed naturally.
3. Houses are made from rearranging preexisting materials. When you talk about creation of universe its not rearrangement but creating matter out of nothing. The two are completely different.

about creation and all
how do u term something a creation..
its simply an inner voice
if ur moving through a rocky mountain and u see rocks do u think about its creator ?
but if u saw a house made of those same rocks..it will instantly cross ur mind that there has to be someone who has built it
 

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
Calling yourself a logical person doesnt make you logical.

Rational people study the evidence and then follow it to find the conclusion

Illogical people make a conclusion first (ie universe as created) theb try to find arguments and evidence to try to rationalize it
The universe
haha i knew u will come up with that since u lack comprehension skills
i asked this question bcz u called me irrational and illogical for assuming that universe is a creation
to which i replied that oki ill buy ur argument (ill not consider universe as a creation) if u give me another example which i by my intution will call creation but evidence will claim the opposite

so again..is there example that u can give which i, by my intution, will call creation but science will say otherwise
PS just to be clear dont say universe
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Okay I think I know where you are trying to go with this.

You are trying to imply that because your intuition says the universe was created therefore it must be true that the universe is created...

Am I right?


haha i knew u will come up with that since u lack comprehension skills
i asked this question bcz u called me irrational and illogical for assuming that universe is a creation
to which i replied that oki ill buy ur argument (ill not consider universe as a creation) if u give me another example which i by my intution will call creation but evidence will claim the opposite

so again..is there example that u can give which i, by my intution, will call creation but science will say otherwise
PS just to be clear dont say universe
 

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
Okay I think I know where you are trying to go with this.

You are trying to imply that because your intuition says the universe was created therefore it must be true that the universe is created...

Am I right?
no u said im illogical to presume on the basis of my intuition to call the universe created without evidence..
to which i said give me a similar example other than universe which my intuition will trick me to call it creation but it will be not
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
So you think it is logical to base the conclusion solely on your intuition?

Let me ask you simple question.

Is your intuition always right about everything?

no u said im illogical to presume on the basis of my intuition to call the universe created without evidence..
to which i said give me a similar example other than universe which my intuition will trick me to call it creation but it will be not
 

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
So here you are trying to make an analogy between a house and a mountain.

You cannot make an analogy between two unrelated things with unrelated properties as it is a logical fallacy known as false analogy.

Let me demonstrate.
1. First you are comparing man made phenomena to natural phenomena. They are not the same.
2. We have witnessed man make houses thats why when we see a house we are confident to say that we created it. No one has ever witnesses a God create a mountain therefore we cannot say with the same level of confidence that the mountain was created. Infact we understand very well the geological process by which mountains are formed naturally.
3. Houses are made from rearranging preexisting materials. When you talk about creation of universe its not rearrangement but creating matter out of nothing. The two are completely different.
thats a good argument..
but when i as a human feel the urge to find the creator of something that was merely build up by the rearrangement of stuff, why should i not look for a creator of something that came into existence out of nothing
 

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
So you think it is logical to base the conclusion solely on your intuition?

Let me ask you simple question.

Is your intuition always right about everything?
dont ask me a counter question plz
i really am not here to win this debate..many a times ive touched the border to cross over

i simply said i look at the universe and find it a creation
u said thats illogical
i said ill admit it illogical if u can give me another such example

so to shut my mouth give me one example where specifically my intuition will tell me its a creation when science/evidence will say its not
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Because the two are unrelated. If something can be made out if rearranging preexisting material does not necessarily imply that something can be created out of nothing. Im not saying that its not possible, but I am saying we cannot compare the two as it would be false analogy.

thats a good argument..
but when i as a human feel the urge to find the creator of something that was merely build up by the rearrangement of stuff, why should i not look for a creator of something that came into existence out of nothing
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Im not trying to shut your mouth im trying to help.

Its not logical to base your conclusion solely on your intuition because your intuition is not always right and I do not need to give you an example to demonstration to prove this as I am sure you are smart enough to know this.

No one would trust a surgeon who has no prior training but does surgery based on his intuition. Intuition is helpful when we need to make fast decisions but it is not reliable for more complex things tthat require thinking.

Intuition on its own is not a reliable methodology to reach a true conclusion. You need something more than that. What do you think that something would be?

dont ask me a counter question plz
i really am not here to win this debate..many a times ive touched the border to cross over

i simply said i look at the universe and find it a creation
u said thats illogical
i said ill admit it illogical if u can give me another such example

so to shut my mouth give me one example where specifically my intuition will tell me its a creation when science/evidence will say its not
 

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
Im not trying to shut your mouth im trying to help.

Its not logical to base your conclusion solely on your intuition because your intuition is not always right and I do not need to give you an example to demonstration to prove this as I am sure you are smart enough to know this.

No one would trust a surgeon who has no prior training but does surgery based on his intuition. Intuition is helpful when we need to make fast decisions but it is not reliable for more complex things tthat require thinking.

Intuition on its own is not a reliable methodology to reach a true conclusion. You need something more than that. What do you think that something would be?
ur again connecting things illogically..
if i i look at a person who is pale yellow,dizzy, nose bleeding etc..what will my intuition tell me that he is sick right..
after this im gona find info why he is yellow what kind of sickness he has which doctor should i send him to bla bla

when i look at the universe i find it a creation..for how it works..my intuition will come out wrong frequently no doubt
 
Last edited:

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
If something can be made out if rearranging preexisting material does not necessarily imply that something can be created out of nothing.
since u like giving dictionary meanings


creation
/kriːˈeɪʃ(ə)n/
Learn to pronounce
noun

  1. 1.
    the action or process of bringing something into existence.
is there any kind of specification that bringing something into existence should only be from preexisting materials
 

Prince of Dhump

MPA (400+ posts)
So we both agree that using intuition is not a reliable method to arrive to the truth of a conclusion?
only an insensible person would argue that its a reliable method...but i guess u havent properly read my post and just jumped to the point which goes in ur favour
 

Vitamin_C

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Ok so what would be a more reliable method to come to a true conclusion if we cannot just rely on intuition alone?

only an insensible person would argue that its a reliable method...but i guess u havent properly read my post and just jumped to the point which goes in ur favour
 
Sponsored Link

Featured Discussions