Love does not exist!

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by DenialTwist, Nov 27, 2011.

  1. #61 Ryan1411, Dec 1, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 1, 2011
    To ask 'why' there is gravity is to ask 'what caused gravity.' Being that gravity is a property of the universe, I do not know what caused the universe and it's properties to form. I mean, other than the accepted big bang theory, of course. I do not know what caused that to happen.

    I will leave any speculation up to the theorists with more knowledge of the subject.
     
  2. incorrect.

    love does exist, and it is in our biology.

    it doesnt matter though, if it is scientific. because it exists.

    its like saying all happyness is, is a chemical response. like duh. all a tv is, is a bunch of electical signals, the show is just an interpretation right?

    as i always say. knowing how somehting works, doesnt change what it is.

    a tv is still a tv, and happyness is still happyness. it doesnt matter if you know the secret or not, its still the same thing
     
  3. indeed :)

    Good work!
     
  4. Alright man, I don't think you understand my point.

    Yeah, but is it trustworthy?


    I just hope you apply this to all your beliefs, because faith is, allegedly, non-sensible to you.
     
  5. #65 Ryan1411, Dec 2, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 2, 2011
    \t\t\t\t\tI understand your point. (I think, lol.) You are arguing that it takes faith to trust sources since they are not direct empirical evidence for a claim. You say that I am using a principle (to have faith) that I argued was non-sensible.


    I am not saying that I trust in each individual source, I am saying that when you look at the sources (of infinite magnitude) collectively , you have essentially diminished any chances of the claim not being true. Each independent and individual piece of evidence has it's level of uncertainty; collectively though, as they speak of the same thing you have created certainty. This removes any need for "faith," as I have not trusted the sources themselves, but rather I have been given sufficient reason to believe because of statistical probabilities.

    And so that brings back my point earlier on: There's a difference between having trust with good reason, and trust without good reason.

    You can trust, for a good reason, that you will pick a black marble out of a bag of 999 black marbles and only 1 white marble. In comparison you can not trust, with good reason, in your ability to pick a black marble out of a bag of 500 black and 500 white.


    I explained above.

    I do, regarding truth-claims at least. I'm probably more emotionally driven when it comes to everyday life.


    Okay I think I'm done discussing if the world exists. We're getting too literal here...:smoke:
     

Share This Page