No, I'm not. You could be the voice of God, presumably, but I think you're human. You could be AI...but probabilistically, I think you're not. You seem to react like a real person.Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 7:20 pm Anadromously: I have no bravado whatsoever. Only absolute certainty. You can't have it. Oh, and er, are you absolutely certain that I don't?
"Nothing can be observed with it?" Scientists will beg to differ. But what is observed is only known probabilistically, not absolutely.Science doesn't deal with absolute certainty, because nothing can be observed with it.
That's not so, of course. Faith is a feature of all knowing. You may have faith that what "scientists" have told you is true. So do I, generally. Of course, they're not always right, because if they were, science itself would be unrevisable. So sometimes, even by their own account, they get things wrong, even though we generally trust them. But the mathematical axioms have to be accepted before all mathematical knowing, and so must be believed prior to confirmation. Lennox should know: he's a professor of mathematics (now retired) from Oxford U.The 'faith' in mathematical axioms you mention is warranted, justified. Just like my 'faith' in science. Religious faith is not. Lennox is a savant believer. First. Naturally.
Actually, the oppositie is true, and verifiably so. Nature is contingent, temporal and transient. And mathematics proves beyond reasonable doubt to anybody who already accepts the basic mathematical axioms, that the universe had a beginning. So we know for sure you're wrong about that....nature is in infinite and eternal. I know this, warrantedly and justifiably.
Actually, I am. The impossibility of an infinite causal regress (mathematical) proves you're not right....you are in no position whatsoever to identify my self deception.
"Apart from good faith, good will, of course. I believe in kindness, social justice; I know the latter can never be attained except in the grave."Quote me where I said I have faith in good will.
You said you believed in it. Don't you? That's faith.
The natural world does not afford objective status to "good." There's nothing moral about the natural -- unless you are now a believer in the old Theistic idea of "natural moral law." I assume you're not.Belief and kindness and good will and good faith are natural.
I need kindness, don't you?
Who promises us that we can have what we need?
Being cognitively biased down to the neuron is entirely natural. I know this for a fact.
If you say so. I don't believe it, because I see that people quite regularly change their beliefs, sometimes the worse for the better. They may come with prejudices, but there's no necessity of them keeping them, if they're open to logic, evidence and reason.
Again, then you're believing in something that we can mathematically disprove conclusively. There's no possible infinite regress of causes. It just doesn't work, even conceptually. So your faith is presently in something untrue. But you can change that. People shed biases all the time.All of it. Infinitely, eternally, all of it. Of that I am absolutely certain.
I simply find that claim implausible. But if you give me the sites, I'll examine the articles.Oh, and, er, I get all of my news from the BBC. It's been full of Christians doing exactly what Muslims do and worse, with less justification, including to Muslims.
From multiple sources, but never just from State-owned media, as a matter of fact.Where do you get yours, Foe?
And I'm not your foe, unless you insist on framing me that way. Again, that's your choice. I'm not angry at you, not hostile, not attacking. I'm just discussing the issues. If that makes me a foe, that's up to you. I don't share your antipathy, though. I'm treating you as a serious interlocutor, and a fellow human being.
