3 ms·
>First of all, the world being rational is a property humans ascribe to it. On an atomic level matter follows specific rules, yes, and we extrapolate a certain
by freejazz 3y ago
>First of all, the world being rational is a property humans ascribe to it. On an atomic level matter follows specific rules, yes, and we extrapolate a certain order from this on a higher level. But I don't see how any of it can be defined as rational, or having any sort of deeper meaning.
You might not be read in philosophy, but surely you understand the word "if"
- voxl 3y agoRight, the parent attacks the axioms as-if they where the argument while simultaneously attacking the source as egotistical. The axioms are of course suspect, but if you give reasonable interpretations to them then the conclusion is not far fetched as they basically necessitate some kind of creator.
- plorkyeran 3y agoThe choice of axioms presented is in fact part of the argument. It's very easy to pick a set of axioms from which your desired conclusion will logically follow. Gödel was not discussing a hypothetical; he was arguing that an afterlife actually did exist, which relies on the axioms he presented applying to the real world. If you disagree with those, everything that comes after that step in the argument is irrelevant.