Ontos

In the beginning God...

[Ontos @gmanm1]

God, theology, metaphysics, Thomism and other .pdf's from various philosophy journals...

https://t.co/sjbzROipF1

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@Redsabr You said "Physics describes what does exist..."

Logic exists

So by your logic - physics describes logic

Who's in error here?

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@Redsabr @icarus62 @AleMartnezR1 Logic exists, but physics has no say in the existence of logic - so physics does not describe (all) what exists.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@AleMartnezR1 Logic judges physics but for those who make physics their god - nothing can rule over it.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@icarus62 @AleMartnezR1 No, physics tells me height length width mass duration location velocity coefficient of friction temperature buoyancy...

Logic alone tells me that two contradictory things cannot both be true.

You keep conflating logic with physics.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@icarus62 @AleMartnezR1 What exactly is the "certain aspect of reality" that logic describes?

If you say the physical universe then we're right back to physics....

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@icarus62 @AleMartnezR1 Physics describes how the physical universe works.

Logic governs whether or not the physics is true or not true.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@NightSkyNow If nothing, then no quantum cosmology.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@limitandmind @AleMartnezR1 Can't argue with Parmenides

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@DrScotMSullivan Casual connections ≠ Logical connections

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@MartinTweats Whatness is fundamental

Whereness is accidental

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@AleMartnezR1 Can't have parts when it's all just energy!

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@tokolosh1961 I'm asking you.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@tokolosh1961 If you'd like to test it then answer my question I asked first

"If matter ceased to exist would 2+2=4 cease being true?"

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@tokolosh1961 If it's not true then it's not intelligible, so if 2+2=4 "requires" matter to be intelligible, then without matter that proposition ceases being true - ceases being intelligible.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@tokolosh1961 If matter ceased to exist would 2+2=4 cease being true?

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@TaraBull

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@tokolosh1961 I already affirmed that man uses a material medium to understand numbers - that's not the issue.

The issue is numbers themselves - numbers themselves are not dependent on matter for their intelligibility.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@tokolosh1961 @AleMartnezR1 Man using a material medium to understand numbers ≠ numbers require matter to be intelligible.

2+2=4 would be logical valid and true if no matter existed.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@tokolosh1961 @AleMartnezR1 You haven't made an argument - you made an unsubstantiated claim.

You need to demonstrate how matter is "required" for making numbers intelligible.

[Ontos @gmanm1]

@jacksonfrandsen It was never trying to describe a source....

Our language cannot help but be positive even when talking about "nothing". And so, somewhere down the line people took "from" literally and started treating non being as-if it were being.