Y
Your Logic Tutor
Guest
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:45036d0a$0$24176$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
>
> "Your Logic Tutor" <ylt...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:N8OdnbQAFqLP9Z7YnZ2dnUVZ_vWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >
> > "Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote
> > <SNIP!!>
> >
> > <unsnip>
> >
> > That is the issue. You and Woodie and Virgil are not going to
demonstrate
> > consciousness outside the brain by arguing from ignorance
>
> I'm not trying to demonstrate anything ...
Yes, I know, and that is a big problem, your side is not even trying to
demonstrate proof of a god or of consciousness outside the brain, you all
want it just taken for granted that there might be a god and there might be
consciousness outside the human brain (a soul, so to speak) because, you
argue _ad ignorantiam_, there is no proof that hypothesis (that 'might be'
conjecture) is false, and that is logical fallacy for which theists are
famous, as Copi explains.
You and Woodie and Virgil are not going to demonstrate, which it is your
burden to do, consciousness outside the brain by arguing from ignorance
there is no proof
the hypothesis (the 'might be' theist conjecture) is false ("No one knows
for certain there is no consciousness outside the brain.") That is logical
fallacy for which theists are famous, as Copi explains:
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given in
criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the
mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope.
Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon was a perfect
sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long taught, argued against
Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the
moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent irregularities
are filled in by an invisible crystalline substance. And this hypothesis,
which saves the perfection of the heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove
false!
Galileo, to expose the argument _ad ignorantium_, offered another of the
same kind as a caricature. Unable to prove the nonexistence of the
transparent crystal supposedly filling the valleys, he put forward the
equally probable hypothesis that there were, rearing up from the invisible
crystalline envelope on the moon, even greater mountain peaks -- but made
of crystal and thus invisible! And this hypothesis his critics could not
prove false.
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_)
[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means conjecture, a speculative, 'might
be' imagining with no basis in fact.]
news:45036d0a$0$24176$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
>
> "Your Logic Tutor" <ylt...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:N8OdnbQAFqLP9Z7YnZ2dnUVZ_vWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >
> > "Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote
> > <SNIP!!>
> >
> > <unsnip>
> >
> > That is the issue. You and Woodie and Virgil are not going to
demonstrate
> > consciousness outside the brain by arguing from ignorance
>
> I'm not trying to demonstrate anything ...
Yes, I know, and that is a big problem, your side is not even trying to
demonstrate proof of a god or of consciousness outside the brain, you all
want it just taken for granted that there might be a god and there might be
consciousness outside the human brain (a soul, so to speak) because, you
argue _ad ignorantiam_, there is no proof that hypothesis (that 'might be'
conjecture) is false, and that is logical fallacy for which theists are
famous, as Copi explains.
You and Woodie and Virgil are not going to demonstrate, which it is your
burden to do, consciousness outside the brain by arguing from ignorance
there is no proof
the hypothesis (the 'might be' theist conjecture) is false ("No one knows
for certain there is no consciousness outside the brain.") That is logical
fallacy for which theists are famous, as Copi explains:
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given in
criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time the
mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his telescope.
Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon was a perfect
sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long taught, argued against
Galileo that, although we see what appear to be mountains and valleys, the
moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all its apparent irregularities
are filled in by an invisible crystalline substance. And this hypothesis,
which saves the perfection of the heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove
false!
Galileo, to expose the argument _ad ignorantium_, offered another of the
same kind as a caricature. Unable to prove the nonexistence of the
transparent crystal supposedly filling the valleys, he put forward the
equally probable hypothesis that there were, rearing up from the invisible
crystalline envelope on the moon, even greater mountain peaks -- but made
of crystal and thus invisible! And this hypothesis his critics could not
prove false.
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_)
[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means conjecture, a speculative, 'might
be' imagining with no basis in fact.]
iq0f2hmicdht1867n7mtuoaqhq2ldcje5@4ax.com...