No, you are the one making a claim, its up to you to demonstrate why your claim is true or why we should accept that its true.

No, you are the one making a claim, its up to you to demonstrate why your claim is true or why we should accept that its true. — DingoJones

But, the claim is true.

You are claiming its true, you have to explain why.

Why, because it is(?)

Thats not an explanation, nor in any way demonstrative of your claim.
I suspect you know this...you bored or something I guess?

Thats not an explanation, nor in any way demonstrative of your claim. — DingoJones

Whereof one cannot speak thereof one ought remain silent^.

Was Dingo correct? Are you just bored?

Alright, well you’ve successfully wasted my time so kudos if that was your goal but we are done here.

No, I am just telling it as a fact.

Well...you may not be bored...but for certain you are not telling it as a fact.

You are asserting it...and you have that right. But unless there is some underlying motivation, you would be doing a bit more to substantiate it.

Just wondering what this drama is all about.

Well...you may not be bored...but for certain you are not telling it as a fact. — Frank Apisa

I am telling it as certain as being a solipsist.

Do other people's experience (being) in the world consitute a single possible world apart from others, or do we all live in one world?

Do other people's experience (being) in the world consitute a single possible world apart from others, or do we all live in one world? — Nils Loc

Both.

Well...you may not be bored...but for certain you are not telling it as a fact.
— Frank Apisa

I am telling it as certain as being a solipsist. — Wallows

Now you are just being silly.


Either explain yourself...or establish your assertion as a fact.

If you persist in asserting "it is so simply because I say it is so"...I just abandon the conversation, because it truly is not a conversation.

@Wallows, you've been taking lessons from @Bartricks.

Okay, I'll prove you wrong.

It is true you can't eat shit. In an other world, shit would taste good, and it would be nutritious.

Everything else being equal, that would be a better world.

And it is possible to imagine such a world where shit not only tastes good, but it's nutritious, too.

So that would be a better world, and it would be possible.

QED. I proved you wrong.

And it warn't hard at all to do it.

Prove me wrong. — Wallows

If the claim "This is the best of all possible worlds" were true, then you would not be questioning it. i.e. No one disputes the claim "Liquid water is wet". So the fact that you have raised the possibility itself indicates the dubitability of the claim.

There are probably greater worlds/zones than Earth; we have spotted exo-planets. Our species is probably not the best in the universe. This is because of resource allocation. Resources can be, and probably are, allocated in greater ways in the universe.

If we're talking about existence, our future children's forms may already be known, especially in purer simulations where bodies are created differently.

Somewhere, there is a comprehensive view of species.

It's my guess that we're not so significant for our species but more our minds.

I'll let you rethink that a little.

If the claim "This is the best of all possible worlds" were true, then you would not be questioning it. — Pantagruel

No, I would actually be propounding, and exalting it!

It is not the 'one making the claim' who has the burden of proof (that is something those with no expertise but big mouths say on youtube videos).

Consider: 'the one making the claim has the burden of proof' is a claim. So now you have to discharge the burden of proof. And no matter how you do it, you will have to make some more claims. And on and on it will go, without end. Thus, if 'the one making the claim has the burden of proof' is true, then nothing can be proved, including that claim.

The lesson: stop pronouncing confidently on matters you know nothing about.

What's a 'possible world'? I have no clear idea.

I think this is the best world. But I am not sure what 'possible' adds.

It is true you can't eat shit. In an other world, shit would taste good, and it would be nutritious. — god must be atheist

Not if you deserve to eat nasty tasting shit. Then a world in which shit tasted good and was nutritious would be a world in which you do not get what you deserve, and thus it would be sub optimal.

It is conceivable that everything that happens is for the best. For what that would take is for this world to be as Reason wants it to be. And given that Reason is omnipotent, it is reasonable to suppose that this world 'is' exactly as Reason wants it to be. And thus reasonable to suppose that everything that happens in it, is ultimately for the best.

Blah, blah, blah. Blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah. Blah blah. Blah? blah blah blah.

Blah-blah.

Thanks Bertrand Russell.

What's a 'possible world'? I have no clear idea. — Bartricks

One where things could have happened differently.

One where things could have happened differently. — Wallows

So it is an actual world? Or just an imaginary one?

So it is an actual world? Or just an imaginary one? — Bartricks

It can be both...

how could it be an actual world? Wouldn't that be equivalent to saying that it 'is' the case rather than it is possibly the case? (No doubt what is actual is possible, but what is possible is not necessarily actual - so possible can't mean actual).

So I think it must mean 'imaginary'. But then the claim is that this is the best world imaginable.

However, most people think they can imagine somewhere better.

Perhaps, however, if they truly understood the nature of the world they are living in, they would realize that they could not imagine a better place.

But then that just amounts to saying that you can't imagine anywhere better once you understand that this world is the best.

But in that case we could just say that this world is maximally good or something. The addition of 'best of all possible worlds' seems to add nothing.

But then that just amounts to saying that you can't imagine anywhere better once you understand that this world is the best.

But in that case we could just say that this world is maximally good or something. The addition of 'best of all possible worlds' seems to add nothing. — Bartricks

Yep, a perfect world, is one where nobody wants anything more, at which point everything then HAS TO become deterministic.

Prove me wrong. — Wallows

hmmm, seems super easy, or impossible, based on such limited information (I could give an answer that some may agree with, and others may claim it is not even evidence)...if you can answer this one, then I can easily answer yours:

I am the best of all possible people. Prove me wrong.

What's a 'possible world'? I have no clear idea.
— Bartricks

One where things could have happened differently. — Wallows

I was worried that this was just a word game (a certain interpretations of definitions means that this is THE ONLY POSSIBLE world, so of course it is the best). Reminds me of christian apologists defining god as "the most perfect being" and of course a being that exists is more perfect than one that does not...so therefor god exists :roll:

Yep, a perfect world, is one where nobody wants anything more, at which point everything then HAS TO become deterministic. — Wallows

This is actually pretty interesting to consider. I can't come up with reasons why a world where nobody wants anything is necessarily more deterministic than a world where people want stuff??