For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Alright then, by using what is not your thought, rather, it is Descartes thought known by you as ''I think therefore I am''Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:30 pmWell, that's not MY question. If you want to ask it, go ahead. I'm not troubled by that.
Descartes covered it, actually.
No, actually. Descartes only made articulate that which is both intuitive and rational for all people.
I read it several times.DPMartin wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:44 amread it for yourselfbahman wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:10 pmSo Serpent sinned first for lying to Eve? They were fooled by Serpent.DPMartin wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:28 pm
no, absolutely not
the Life that God gave Adam (Luk 3:38 "Adam, which was the son of God.") which included God's image and likeness, requires belief and trust (faith) in the Lord God's Word to live it. so no you're incorrect. the tree of Life was also available to A&E before the trouble began.
he believed and or trusted her, and she believed and or trust in the words of the serpent.
God asks me to choose between Vanilla ice cream and chocolate ice cream. I know that He wants me to choose vanilla ice cream because He told me. But I choose chocolate ice cream to exercise my free will. Both are happy. You can replace ice creams with any other good things or actions.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:17 pmWell, let's see if that's true.
Give me an example you're happy with.
But it was You IC who was being asked to answer the question ''WHO told you you exist''Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:26 pmNo, actually. Descartes only made articulate that which is both intuitive and rational for all people.
Well, it's not a moral choice...that's just aesthetic.bahman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:38 pmGod asks me to choose between Vanilla ice cream and chocolate ice cream.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:17 pmWell, let's see if that's true.
Give me an example you're happy with.
Aha. Now you've made it into a moral issue...but not because of ice cream at all. What you've said is, "Is it okay for me to go against the explicit commandments of God." The issue now becomes disobedience, not taste. And the answer is that to disobey God is to violate one's relationship with Him.I know that He wants me to choose vanilla ice cream because He told me.
The problem was just that the question was ill-formed. It presupposed that a person can't know she exists without somebody telling her she does. But that's obviously wrong.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:50 pmBut it was You IC who was being asked to answer the question ''WHO told you you exist''Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:26 pmNo, actually. Descartes only made articulate that which is both intuitive and rational for all people.
then what are you asking us for if you know already
IC..I'm just asking you HOW all of us, not just you...how we know we exist. That's all.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:59 pmThe problem was just that the question was ill-formed. It presupposed that a person can't know she exists without somebody telling her she does. But that's obviously wrong.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:50 pmBut it was You IC who was being asked to answer the question ''WHO told you you exist''Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:26 pm
No, actually. Descartes only made articulate that which is both intuitive and rational for all people.
So I have to reject the presupposition...to continue with it will not yield a logical or true result. And I presume we're looking for truth here, no?
And I'm answering "Intuitively and rationally. We all just know."
No IC..we only think we know...remember... I think therefore I amImmanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pmAnd I'm answering "Intuitively and rationally. We all just know."
Descartes was wrong. We know nothing except what is perceived to be conceived and then believed....without ever once clapping eyes on the assumed perceiver, conceiver, believer...it is only as and through the organic biological sense organs that we are tricked into knowing the action of knowing, as reflexive reaction .. and just as pain and odour and touch and taste is NEVER SEEN...there is no one to own those senses and call them mine.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pmWe take it for granted the minute we come our of our mothers' wombs, and we never forget it. Descartes explained to us rationally why it is we do that; he did not make it happen, nor did he make it rational to do so. It was already rational. He just explained what we already knew.
No, you say we only think we know. I say we all know.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:48 pmNo IC..we only think we know...Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pmAnd I'm answering "Intuitively and rationally. We all just know."
Your argument is weak.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:59 pmNo, you say we only think we know. I say we all know.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:48 pmNo IC..we only think we know...Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:26 pm
And I'm answering "Intuitively and rationally. We all just know."
So why God bother to create a free agent if the agent cannot even decide between two good things. Just make a robot.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:57 pmWell, it's not a moral choice...that's just aesthetic.bahman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:38 pmGod asks me to choose between Vanilla ice cream and chocolate ice cream.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:17 pm
Well, let's see if that's true.
Give me an example you're happy with.
Aha. Now you've made it into a moral issue...but not because of ice cream at all. What you've said is, "Is it okay for me to go against the explicit commandments of God." The issue now becomes disobedience, not taste. And the answer is that to disobey God is to violate one's relationship with Him.I know that He wants me to choose vanilla ice cream because He told me.
It's the same as if your wife asked you not to put your feet on the coffee table. You might decide that putting your feet on the coffee table is fine, and that you like to do it, and that you want to exercise your free will to do it. But you won't be surprised if you wife feels that your decision to ignore her preferences and to carry on as if she doesn't exist is somewhat insulting to her...and violates your duty to be caring about what she desires. You've now turned a coffee table into a battleground over more important issues.
So now you're not talking about merely neutral choices at all. One is genuinely good (to respect your wife), and one is genuinely evil (to treat her as if she doesn't matter), and you can't be surprised if your relationship with her goes bad as a result.