Editing Proof by logic

From Religions Wiki

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

Contributing to Religions Wiki requires agreement with the privacy policy. Please review it before posting.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 54: Line 54:
* That in reality, it's an endless cycle of universes, etc.
* That in reality, it's an endless cycle of universes, etc.


This argument cannot possibly work, because it relies on assumptions being plugged into the required logical premises. The fact is, we have little to no information about what happened "before" the big bang, or even have a complete understanding of causality beyond our simplified Earthly understanding of how things work. Just like we couldn't extend Newtonian mechanics into approaching-the-speed-of-light speeds, we aren't justified in extending our current laws of physics into the extremes, as discussed in this argument, where the laws break.
This argument cannot possibly work, because it relies on assumptions being plugged into the required logical premises. The fact is, we have little to no information about what happened "before" the big bang, or even have a complete understanding of causality beyond our simplified Earthly understanding of how things work. Just like we couldn't extend [[Newtonian mechanics]] into approaching-the-speed-of-light speeds, we aren't justified in extending our current laws of physics into the extremes, as discussed in this argument, where the laws break.


Arguably, the premises must be justified by additional arguments, and so on, causing an [[infinite regress]] per the [[Münchhausen trilemma]]. The alternative sources of premise validity are axiomatic assumptions or based on perceptual experience (psychologism).
Arguably, the premises must be justified by additional arguments, and so on, causing an [[infinite regress]] per the [[Münchhausen trilemma]]. The alternative sources of premise validity are axiomatic assumptions or based on perceptual experience (psychologism).
Please note that all contributions to Religions Wiki are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 (see Religions Wiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To edit this page, please enter the words that appear below in the box (more info):

Refresh
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: