☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
2+2=5: A Case For Agnostic-Atheism
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sinister" data-source="post: 121492" data-attributes="member: 2684"><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Caspian,</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Using logic to personally refute the existence of a socially constructed enigma such as god (abrahamic or otherwise) is all well and good….it’s mostly a matter of taste. But are you at all interested in using logic to reach illogical conclusions...have you ever tried that? And how would that affect your arguments above, on fuzy words like god, logic, and religion? </span></span></p><p><FONT size=3><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><?"urn:<img src="http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/ /></FONT></FONT></P><P><FONT face=" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /><span style="font-size: 12px">Not only is god illogical but any reductionist will tell you that logic itself reaches (approaches) illogical conclusions many times over…None of the physical sciences reconcile/accept logical absolutes in any outcome or viable observation...everything is agnostic by default.</span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Irrational numbers (like square root 2, sqrt{2}) exist yet are beyond definitive knowledge and comprehension and are considered reductio ad absurdum. Where { sqrt(2)= 1/cos (pie/4)=1/sin(pie/4)}… (other irrationals include e, sqrt(61), and Pi,etc.)</span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Let us suppose that 2+2=4, sure, but logically one could argue 2+2 also= NO SOLUTION ....ad infinitum/ e /root 2 or/ pi or any other variation of a non rational number according to a mathematical anomaly known as proof of infinite descent. In Fact, any rational number can be written as the sum of two irrational numbers in an infinite number of ways. </span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'">If two numbers sum to a rational number then either both numbers are rational or both numbers are irrational. (The proof of this by contradiction is trivial.) Thus, given a rational number, <em>r</em>, then for ANY irrational number, <em>i</em>, the irrational pair (<em>i, r-i</em>) sum to <em>r</em>. So, the statement can actually be strengthened to say that there are an infinite number of ways of writing a rational number as the sum of two irrational numbers. </span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Rational is an evaluation of the effort to attain the belief and logical is an evaluation of the belief itself. A true rationalist would argue that both are based upon sentiment.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">The existence of paradoxes within logic are not uncommon. I will give you a simple one…Zeno's Paradox of motion...i posted it on this website not to long ago...you can look it up. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><a href="http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/leisure/24681-motion-impossible.html" target="_blank">http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/leisure/24681-motion-impossible.html</a></span></span></p><p> </p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">We can even discuss quantum mechanics at length. How deep is your background in the study of quantum mechanics? Judging from what you have posted above I think you should dwell more on that.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">In the physical world you run into the heisenberg uncertainty principle…the irrationality of the most fundamental observation in science…MEASUREMENT…which cannot be be deduced to any level of certainty. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">I am not saying that logic is useless, it is very important tool for the reliabilist (probabilist) but it does have loopholes and traps that cannot be rectified.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'"><span style="font-size: 12px">cheers</span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sinister, post: 121492, member: 2684"] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]Caspian,[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]Using logic to personally refute the existence of a socially constructed enigma such as god (abrahamic or otherwise) is all well and good….it’s mostly a matter of taste. But are you at all interested in using logic to reach illogical conclusions...have you ever tried that? And how would that affect your arguments above, on fuzy words like god, logic, and religion? [/SIZE][/FONT] <FONT size=3>[FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode]<?"urn:[IMG]http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/ /></FONT></FONT></P><P><FONT face=[/IMG][SIZE=3]Not only is god illogical but any reductionist will tell you that logic itself reaches (approaches) illogical conclusions many times over…None of the physical sciences reconcile/accept logical absolutes in any outcome or viable observation...everything is agnostic by default.[/SIZE][/FONT] [SIZE=3][FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][/FONT][/SIZE] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]Irrational numbers (like square root 2, sqrt{2}) exist yet are beyond definitive knowledge and comprehension and are considered reductio ad absurdum. Where { sqrt(2)= 1/cos (pie/4)=1/sin(pie/4)}… (other irrationals include e, sqrt(61), and Pi,etc.)[/SIZE][/FONT] [SIZE=3][FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][/FONT][/SIZE] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]Let us suppose that 2+2=4, sure, but logically one could argue 2+2 also= NO SOLUTION ....ad infinitum/ e /root 2 or/ pi or any other variation of a non rational number according to a mathematical anomaly known as proof of infinite descent. In Fact, any rational number can be written as the sum of two irrational numbers in an infinite number of ways. [/SIZE][/FONT] [SIZE=3][FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode]If two numbers sum to a rational number then either both numbers are rational or both numbers are irrational. (The proof of this by contradiction is trivial.) Thus, given a rational number, [I]r[/I], then for ANY irrational number, [I]i[/I], the irrational pair ([I]i, r-i[/I]) sum to [I]r[/I]. So, the statement can actually be strengthened to say that there are an infinite number of ways of writing a rational number as the sum of two irrational numbers. [/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][/FONT][/SIZE] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]Rational is an evaluation of the effort to attain the belief and logical is an evaluation of the belief itself. A true rationalist would argue that both are based upon sentiment.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]The existence of paradoxes within logic are not uncommon. I will give you a simple one…Zeno's Paradox of motion...i posted it on this website not to long ago...you can look it up. [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3][URL]http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/leisure/24681-motion-impossible.html[/URL][/SIZE][/FONT] [SIZE=3][FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][/FONT][/SIZE] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]We can even discuss quantum mechanics at length. How deep is your background in the study of quantum mechanics? Judging from what you have posted above I think you should dwell more on that.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]In the physical world you run into the heisenberg uncertainty principle…the irrationality of the most fundamental observation in science…MEASUREMENT…which cannot be be deduced to any level of certainty. [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]I am not saying that logic is useless, it is very important tool for the reliabilist (probabilist) but it does have loopholes and traps that cannot be rectified.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][SIZE=3]cheers[/SIZE][/FONT] [SIZE=3][FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode][/FONT][/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
2+2=5: A Case For Agnostic-Atheism
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top