On Hume and order in nature

[ QUOTE ]
NotReady was attempting to make the case that science is "faith"-based since it relies on an unprovable assumption that nature is orderly. My point here was to state that I think order in nature is true in an axiomatic sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

An axiom IS an unprovable assumption. It's "self-evidently true" because it can't be proven. "The Universe exists" is an axiom, and it is an unprovable assumption.

axiom
n (logic) a proposition that is not susceptible of proof or disproof; its truth is assumed to be self-evident

[jthegreat]

[ QUOTE ]
An axiom IS an unprovable assumption. It's "self-evidently true" because it can't be proven. "The Universe exists" is an axiom, and it is an unprovable assumption.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, no, NO. It's unprovable, but it is not an assumption. It's a proposition that is known to be true. It doesn't need to be true.

It's true in an obvious way. It's not "self-evidently true because it can't be proven." You either totally don't get this or you have a horrible way of explaining it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
An axiom IS an unprovable assumption. It's "self-evidently true" because it can't be proven. "The Universe exists" is an axiom, and it is an unprovable assumption.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, no, NO. It's unprovable, but it is not an assumption. It's a proposition that is known to be true. It doesn't need to be true.

It's true in an obvious way. It's not "self-evidently true because it can't be proven." You either totally don't get this or you have a horrible way of explaining it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to have made a leap from the descartian 'I think therfore I am' to 'I think therefore an ordered universe exists'

How did you make this leap? or by an ordered universe do you just mean that as you exist then whatever is required for you to exist must exist.

chez

[jthegreat]

[ QUOTE ]
You seem to have made a leap from the descartian 'I think therfore I am' to 'I think therefore an ordered universe exists'


[/ QUOTE ]

No, because "I think, therefore I am" isn't an axiom. "I think" is an axiom. "The Universe is ordered" is also an axiom. Look around you. It's obvious.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You seem to have made a leap from the descartian 'I think therfore I am' to 'I think therefore an ordered universe exists'


[/ QUOTE ]

No, because "I think, therefore I am" isn't an axiom. "I think" is an axiom. "The Universe is ordered" is also an axiom. Look around you. It's obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]
ah! the argument from obviousness.

Its obviously true therefore it must be true. Some people think its obvious there's a god therefore ...

chez

[jthegreat]

Let's not be silly. You can see and experience order in the universe. God is frustratingly invisible. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

An axiom IS an unprovable assumption


[/ QUOTE ]

Finally. Thank you.

You too, Philo.

[jthegreat]

What a shock. MORE intellectual dishonesty from NotReady.

An axiom doesn't require proof. It's something that's obviously true. An axiom is not an assumption and it does not require proof.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's not be silly. You can see and experience order in the universe. God is frustratingly invisible. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
To you and to me, maybe we just don't see very well. Its not the point though, obviousness doesn't imply truth and to assume it does requires a leap of something or other.

chez

[jthegreat]

With some things, it does. Existence is axiomatic. That it's ordered is also axiomatic. Let me ask you... what have you ever seen that would make you think otherwise?