Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
re: "I choose to believe that the whole is equal to the sum of its parts."
Can you CHOOSE to believe - be convinced - that the whole is NOT equal to the sum of its parts?
Keep in mind that in order for a thing to be considered a choice, there must be at least two things to select from, and each one of the things has to be able to be selected. In the above example there are three options available - option (1) believe that the whole is equal to the sum of its parts, option (2) believe that the whole is not equal to the sum of its parts, and option (3) do not believe either way. I am simply asking you to select option number (2).
And you have a question directed to you in post #25.
RESPONSE:
Yes. I can choose to believe the conventional that the whole is equal to the sum of its parts, or the far less conventional that there may be something in addition to the sum of its parts. It's a choice regarding what to believe.
CORRECTED POST:NONE of these are CHOICES . . . unless YOU CAN believe their opposites! You have clearly never had a philosophy or logic course . . . unless you are just a poor student.
RESPONSE:
That the sun will rise tomorrow is a probability based on experience. Strictly speaking, it is not an absolute proof.
I choose to believe, based on the clear preponderence of the evidence, that it will. But I can't be absolutely sure.
CORRECTED POST:NONE of these are CHOICES . . . unless YOU CAN believe their opposites! You have clearly never had a philosophy or logic course . . . unless you are just a poor student.
RESPONSE One acts rationally when one chooses a to believe something based on the evidence.
I choose to believe that the whole is equal to the sum of its parts. (logic)
I choose to believe that the sun will rise tomorrow. (experience)
In the posts above, I have demonstrated the rationale for disbelieving one or both of these theses. One gets to choose, assuming that one's ability to choose isn't impaired.
"Neurosis may also be recognized by the inability to choose wisely: that is to choose in conformance with one's true psychological needs. People can be divided into good and bad choosers just as chickens may be. Some people who are poor perceivers can believe in falsehoods year after year even though truth constantly stares them in the face."
The Third Force: The Psychology of Abraham Maslow, by Frank G. Goble (available on the web)
Last edited by ancient warrior; 09-30-2010 at 08:09 AM..
Reason: dropping sizing information
CORRECTED POST:NONE of these are CHOICES . . . unless YOU CAN believe their opposites! You have clearly never had a philosophy or logic course . . . unless you are just a poor student.
RESPONSE:
Or I'm correct. Perhaps you can't make that choice.
I have evidence that I'm satisfied with, but it was personal and experential. It doesn't translate well to other people, because reality is subjective. I have all the proof that *I* need, but don't think it would convince anyone else who doesn't want to believe.
You are tiresome and haven't answered anything. No one CHOOSES what to believe . . . they either believe or do not believe, period. All those claiming to choose are misguided and self-deceived that their CLAIMS are their beliefs . . . they are NOT. What you really believe is revealed in other ways.[/quote]
Really? Because I can give lip service to ANY belief, and for all intents and purposes, believe it to be true completely. To the extent that a lie detector would not detect any deception.
If I am to be expected to hold a certain belief--or die--I will, for all appearances, hold that belief.
I have evidence that I'm satisfied with, but it was personal and experential. It doesn't translate well to other people, because reality is subjective. I have all the proof that *I* need, but don't think it would convince anyone else who doesn't want to believe.
RESPONSE:
That might be reasonable if there is no objective evidence available for you to base your choice on.
I can't recall the name of the author, but he pointed out that you can reasonably choose to believe what you ever you prefer as long as there is not concrete evidence against that choice.
I choose to believe that the whole is equal to the sum of its parts. (logic)
Actually, if you take 100 ml of ammonia, and 100 ml of water, and add them together, they will fall short of 200 ml.
RESPONSE:
I think this works with alcohol and water too. The reason is that the particle sizes differ and thus the total of the volumes are not additive. But still, the total is equal to the sum of it part(icles).
If we are talking about choices of belief within the religious sphere, clearly there are a number of choices available. Consider the variety of the world's religions.
And even within religions there are choices that can be made of what to believe. For example, based on the New Testament, one may choose to believe that Jesus was divine or not divine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
