Reminder that no one has ever proved this wrong
That something must exist for there to be truth is one thing, that there is a particular type of god is an entirely different matter. I'm sure Peterson explained his metaphysics and theology somewhere else, because that tweet is a joke.
Daily reminder that no one who makes these threads understands Gödel's incompleteness theorems.
Jesus christ what a fucking pseud
Using fucking Godel as a proof for God while the fucking conclusion of his work is that true things exist that are unprovable
Also, the observation that fucking axioma's are prerequisites for rigorous proofs are as old as western society
pseud. a person with strong opinions on subjects they know shit about
Godel as a proof for God
the f------- conclusion of his work is true things exist that are unprovable
And that is why faith is necessary.
Also, have you ever thought about why you use so much profanity when you communicate?
Faith for what exactly? Why does it have to be God?
Besides, even if proving something requires God, it wouldn't mean that God exists.
Faith that an objective capital-T truth exists and many people call that Truth God.
How does that ake sense at all?
You can't prove anything unless you believe in a thing that can't be proved because reasons
Is Peterson a XXI century sofist?
Still wouldn't mean that God exists.
Gödel proved that we are incapable of perfectly modeling reality and therefore it necessarily follows that things exist that are categorically beyond human understanding and must be taken on faith i.e. human perception of reality is fundamentally incomplete.
We call that moving the goal post.
what if Godel was God all along...
I fail to see how "WE CAN'T KNOW IF ANYTHING IS REAL!!!" means that believing in God is necessary.
At least the "assumptions" of science and math have some good results like toasters, medixine and computers.
Faith in God seems just as fruitless as faith in Zeus.
Affirming that nothing can really be known is just shooting yourself in the foot if you are christian, science not so much even from a semi-solipsistic viewpoint.
I believe it's more along the lines of if you believe in an ordered universe an intelligent Creator is a plausible explanation for that order; Christians call Him the "Logos."
Faith in God repairs morals.
That’s the cause of much economic and political concern today. If God is real, he solves a whole hell of a lot of problems in that sphere.
somebody shopped Peterson's twitter handle on top of some one else's tweet
thank me later
Faith in God repairs morals.
Probably works for a lot of people, but if they need the threat of divine punishment to stop behaving in an amoral or immoral fashion they have weak character.
yeah, Peterson never tweeted that.
its not so much that fear of punishment is required to act morally, thats not the issue
When that argument is presented, it is often misinterpreted as "Without God there is no punishment for immorality, thus immoral actions are pragmatically sound, thus atheists should do merely what materialistically interests them"
when the real purpose of the argument is something closer to "In a completely materialistic universe with no moral arbitrator/being powerful enough to make/create morality with absolute standard, as one would interpret to exist within an atheist's world, it is impossible to act moral, for their is no such thing as morality for what is moral is simply whatever one feels is right; so to give to charity is as moral as to stomp an infant's head. for neither action is moral, its just that one is generally approved of while the other isnt."
Jordan Peterson has not read godels theorems
TO BE FAIR, you need a high level of IQ to understand God......
when a non mathematician tries to understand mathematics
It is spelled sophist you mutt.
they shouldn't, a god has to be some sort of intelligence to be a god
The Logos set the stars on their course.
Spinoza's God isn't intelligent in the way we are and still fits the description well.
It's not literal you spaz.
El is a Hebrew way of saying God
At last I truly see
lol wat? Godel's theorem (if you accept ZCF) was that no one single axiomatic system could account for all truthful propositions. Or rather, there are truthful statements that are unproveable by a consistent axiomatic system.
And lol "faith". You're standing on the shoulders of drooling apes who play zero-sum social hierarchy games and are all too willing to say bullshit statements and actually believe in them. You have won nothing and know less than nothing if you think Maya spares the naive.