That. -- Ben's Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Thursday, October 17, 08:58:57pm

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: That.

Author:
Wade A. Tisthammer

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 03/13/04 1:38pm
In reply to: Damoclese 's message, "This." on 03/12/04 4:18pm

>>> Comments like
>>>>"we cannot DEDUCE whether there has been an infinite
>>>>past or not, because there are no PREMISES from
>which
>>>>to argue" don't do much to attack the argument.
>>>
>
>>What question draws into doubt a premise in my
>>argument? And what is that premise?
>
>There is no premise to support the idea of an infinite
>past to begin with. (or a finite past) Therefore the
>postulation everywhere in your argument of "infinite
>past" is assumed and not necessarily a real entity to
>begin with.

Mmm, no the truth of an infinite past is never assumed anywhere in the premises. We have some conditional statements, analysis, modus tollens etc. but never do I assume that an infinite past exists.

Pick a specific premise and try again.

>Your
>argument unfortunately contains the logical fallacy of
>knowing the unknowable. (namely that time has to
>either be infinite or finite neither of which is known)

Where do I make that "logical fallacy"? Nowhere in the argument do I make the assumption in your last sentence.

Pick a specific premise and try again please.

(You can't reject the conclusion without at least addressing a premise.)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Premise pogo	Damoclese	03/13/04 1:51pm
Don't pogo around the premises, pick one! -- Wade A. Tisthammer, 03/13/04 2:23pm twister -- Damoclese, 03/13/04 3:01pm 'round and 'round we go... -- Wade A. Tisthammer, 03/13/04 4:26pm In the argument -- Damoclese, 03/13/04 7:29pm I can do that too. -- Wade A. Tisthammer, 03/13/04 10:17pm But not as well -- Damoclese, 03/14/04 8:11am Where are the assumptions? -- Wade A. Tisthammer, 03/15/04 12:23pm Confession of much apathy -- Damoclese, 03/15/04 5:29pm If you're apathetic about this, why have you continued so far? -- Wade A. Tisthammer, 03/18/04 9:55am