Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Logic
All located on the planet Earth, which in a debate as to the likelihood of extra terrestrial life reduces your number of locations to one.
I am evidently attempting to communicate on a level of philosophical thought outside of your experiences to date. [1]
The quest for the establishment of the nature of absolute truth has been the topic of fierce philosophical debate throughout documented history. [2] Indeed the only logical conclusion which can be reached by sound critical reasoning is that[3]; Since all information is transferred to our consciences via nerve impulses to the brain via sensory organs and neural networks, therefore existing solely in our individual conciousness and being entirely subjective, our perception of truth is in itself illusory. [4]
'Reality' itself is therefore an illusion,[5] rendering all we perceive in itself a belief system, open to the same passionate argumentation as the initial topic tabled for discussion.[6]
|
1] Rhetorical. An example of ad hominem argument, which is fallacious. Also, as it happens, untrue in this particular case, but I see no point in a "philosophy degree measuring" contest, if "Mr Logic" even has one. (Rhetorical by me
)
2] Rhetorical. While this is true it is also irrelevant, but put in to attempt to make the reader infer that the poster is knowledgeable about philosophical debate throughout recorded history. An example of the appeal to authority.
3] Rhetorical. "Mr Logic" merely asserts that his conclusions are true and necessarily true, while not actually demonstrating any "sound critical reasoning".
4] There is so much wrong with this that it is hard to know where to start. This statement of the mind-body problem conflates information with beliefs, the mechanisms by which we come to have beliefs with the beliefs themselves, and subjectivity with illusion. None of these stand up to scrutiny.
5] "Mr Logic" goes from the statement "our perception of truth is in itself illusory" to "'Reality' itself is therefore an illusion" which does not follow at all, even if the first proposition were true. "Mr Logic" is relying on the way in which human understanding tends to work through the association of ideas. Jumble them all up enough and you can end up with people believing that reality is illusion, black is white, all is one. The point of philosophy is to untangle these confusions, not to make them worse.
6] I cannot help noticing that "Mr Logic" has completely failed to address my objections to his post, namely that (If A&B Then A) is irrefutably true, and that his position is self contradictory.