The logical truth and reality of God's believing mind.
- Thread starter Tercon
- Start date
I don't care who they are, because if they think that reality is knowable outside of a believing mind, then they went to school to learn how to be stupid.
Explain how you know that wave function collapse can occur without a mind in order for it to occur in and with?
I am not responsible for your inability to think properly.
So my claim is false because "no-one disputes" it and this somehow "refutes" my "own claims", just how does that work?
I did, because wave function collapse requires "an observer" IOW a believing mind in order for wave function collapse to occur. And you can't show otherwise.
Tetsugaku
Well-known member
That's not what they are saying. They are saying that you are wrong about QM.
Do you want me to give you the quote again? So you can ignore it again and continue pretending you know QM better than actual physicists?
Tetsugaku
Well-known member
You are responsible for your failure to read properly. I gave you four objections and you have not addressed them.
No, that's not what I said.
Whatsisface
Well-known member
Please refer to what Nouveau said.
Electric Skeptic
Well-known member
Unsupported as always.
H
HouOz
Guest
And "If" it's not?
I can prove it isn't as truths and reality existed before man.
I have not seen from anyone including you how physicality is possible outside or without a believing mind, so wave function collapse can occur. No physicist has ever shown that physicality is possible outside or without a believing mind in order to observe or measure it
Anyone can know how the truth and reality is known, all they have to do is believe it.
You have not shown anywhere what I have said is false or illogical, you just continue to bluff your way through life.
Sure it is, as you keep saying that "no-one disputes" what I am saying about the truth and reality, but yet you saying that "no-one disputes" this somehow "refutes" my "own claims", just how does that work?
I did and he can't help you.
How come you can't refute it then silly?
Yes, as the truths and reality always existed in God's believing mind.
Whatsisface
Well-known member
You forgot to say why.
Because he cannot name of one instance when the truth and reality was known that it wasn't a believing mind making it known silly.
Whatsisface
Well-known member
This is typical of you, to avoid the context and go straight to your stock in trade. The context was the collapse of the wave function.
Strawman and projection, because if you are not referring to and denoting the same context, in how and why the truth and reality is known to us how and why the collapse of the wave function occurs in and to us is in fact the one and same context. Then you aren't referring to and denoting the same thing I am. Understand?
Last edited:
Tetsugaku
Well-known member
You're confusing idealism and QM. You have not shown that physicality is impossible outside of a mind, and you have not shown that QM requires a mind for wave function collapse. Actual physicists disagree with you.
This doesn't answer the question you were replying to.
Again, I gave you four clear objections and you've addressed none of them. So the bluffing is all yours.
You've been told exactly how it works. Whenever you are called out on one of your more preposterous BS claims (like reality requiring a mind, being a mind, and also being inside a mind) you fall back on a trivial claim that no-one disputes (like knowledge requiring a mind) and demand that we disprove that instead. It is a very transparent bait-and-switch that you've also been called out on many times.
Oy vey. Van Til? Seriously???
I have not seen one that showed how and why a believing mind isn't necessary for wave function collapse to occur. But if you have, then march it out and present it.
Sure it does, because in reality you cannot and have not named one instance when a believing mind wasn't necessary in order to make the truth and reality known to us. You are wallowing around in your own nonsense pretending that this delusion of yours exists, yet you cannot articulate it in a way that shows how this is even possible. Understand?
So, when you are ready to leave that delusion let me know.
I see no argument.
The fact that you don't understand speaks volumes. You're copying Van Til and Bahnsen's flawed presuppositionalism.
Tetsugaku
Well-known member
I gave it to you and you ignored it and ran away. I just asked if you wanted me to repost it and you ignored the question.
Really? What was the question that you think your response answered? I bet you don't even know.
You prove my point. No-one disagrees with the trivial truth that knowledge requires a mind. You keep arguing 'trivial truth, therefore complete nonsense' and when we say the nonsense is false and doesn't follow from your trivial truth, you demand we disprove the trivial truth instead of addressing what we actually disagree with.