So you think people are not intelligent enough to measure people's intelligence. — god must be atheist

That means, that people's intelligence is below the level of their own intelligence. — god must be atheist

“The problem,” Leveson wrote in a book, “is that we are attempting to build systems that are beyond our ability to intellectually manage.” But these systems have become so complicated that hardly anyone can keep them straight in their head. Barr described what they found as “spaghetti code,” programmer lingo for software that has become a tangled mess. The problem is that programmers are having a hard time keeping up with their own creations. Even very good programmers are struggling to make sense of the systems that they are working with. — The Coming Software Apocalypse

We're not resposible for the planet. The planet takes care of itself. It was surviving a long time before humans. We, the human species, have need for a planet. Destruction of habitat is stupidity. We would be wiser to rationalize with our resources. — Qwex

So news of their respective demises is still very much premature. — 180 Proof

Religious studies are a part of many liberal arts colleges and universities and can be majored in, often, and masters and doctorate programs are also available at liberal arts institutions. — Coben

Is it, as some assert, that a statement has the property of truth or is it that a statement is merely labelled as true? — A Seagull

("Socrates is mortal",true)

The trouble with asserting that truth is a property of a statement is in finding a logical process by which the property of truth can be identified. — A Seagull

if(T.eval("Socrates is mortal")) then 
  doThis()
else
 doThat()
end

Tarski's artificial meta-system fails to answer this question. — A Seagull

Then statements like' this statement is true' make no more sense than 'this statement is blue'. and statements like ' this statement is false' would no longer be problematic. — A Seagull

Modern Science is an atheistic endeavour. — VoidDetector

First I reject all knowledge which may be expressed in the statement A = All propositions are false. — TheMadFool

The theorem applies more generally to any sufficiently strong formal system, showing that truth in the standard model of the system cannot be defined within the system. — Wikipedia on Tarski's undefinability

Do you think this'll work? — TheMadFool

No, this is an empirical question, not an axiomatic question. — god must be atheist

I don't think the answer to "is there a god" comparable to proving second degree five-unknown sets of differential equations with N degree of freedom. — god must be atheist

The naturals are assumed to be closed under a single-valued "successor" function S. For every natural number n, S(n) is a natural number. — Peano's 6th axiom of number theory

What's PM? — god must be atheist

This following is an excerpt from Principia Mathematica (PM) — alcontali

If you study Wittgenstein, Kant, Russell, and the other newfangled philosophers, you'll realize what I am talking about. — god must be atheist

Put (fa) ./! (fa%x) . =. : (<f>) ./ ! {(y) .<£!(£, y), x] : (<f>) ./! {(ay) . </> ! (z, y), x],
where/! {(y) . <f> ! (z, y), x) is constructed as follows: wherever, in/! {<£ ! z, x},
a value of <j>, say <f> I a, occurs, substitute (y) . <£ ! (a, y), and develop by the
definitions at the 'beginning of #8. / ! {(ay) . <f> I (z, y), x] is similarly con-
structed. — Is Bertrand Russell readable?

How do you handle that? — Pfhorrest

Except this person says that math stuff proves their opinions about race/sex/etc. — Pfhorrest

What do you mean? Free from empirical data? Free from experience? But then, from where does pure reason get its input? Where does it come from? — Pussycat

In the preface to the first edition, Kant explains that by a "critique of pure reason" he means a critique "of the faculty of reason in general, in respect of all knowledge after which it may strive independently of all experience" — Wikipedia on Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason', the definition of 'Pure Reason'

Ah, I remember Godel saying that he was fond of Islam, finding it a consistent idea of religion and open-minded. This is what he was talking about, right? — Pussycat

So you are saying that Islam is being caught in the crossfire, because of christianity? — Pussycat

Surely this is true about the zero-set of any function whatsoever. The study of the zero sets of polynomials is algebraic geometry. That's where I'd look for answers to these sorts of questions. — fishfry

Off the top of my head since there must be models of the reals of all infinite cardinalities, the zero-set of xy - 1 = 0 would have the cardinality of whatever model you're looking at. — fishfry

But honestly to the best of my understanding I don't think this means anything. — fishfry

My personal opinion is that people shouldn't get too hung up on Lowenheim-Skolem. It's essentially a curiosity. — fishfry

Philosophy without Logic or Reasoning would be Faith and Religion. — Gnomon

The magisterium of the Catholic Church is the church's authority or office to give authentic interpretation of the Word of God, "whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition." ... Such solemn declarations of the church's teaching involve the infallibility of the Church. ... Such teachings of the ordinary and universal magisterium are obviously not given in a single specific document. ... men who had to be obeyed by virtue of their position, regardless of their personal holiness, and the distinction between “man” and “office.” — Wikipedia on the 'living' magisterium of the Church

Claiming the behaviors of billions of individuals are determined by who they are closely related to doesn't make empirical sense in the context of human society or biology more generally. — Enrique

Racism is learned cultural behavior. — Baden

In normative ethics, people resort to different systems like deontology, utilitarianism, rights, and virtues. — Peaceful Discord

The result is that everything must be taken as possibly true until we can show that it is false. — Pfhorrest

What does 'true' mean in this context? — A Seagull

First I reject all knowledge which may be expressed in the statement A = All propositions are false. If A is true the A is false because A is itself a proposition. Ergo, A is false which then implies B = Some propositions are true. It is absolutely certain that B is true. — TheMadFool

Gödel-Henkin model existence theorem.
We say that a theory T is syntactically consistent if there is no sentence s such that both s and its negation ¬s are provable from T in our deductive system. The model existence theorem says that for any first-order theory T with a well-orderable language, if T is syntactically consistent, then T has a model. — Wikipedia on Gödel's completeness theorem

• The empty theory has an empty model, which is equivalent to no model. All its non-existent sentences are false, but all its non-existent sentences are also true. That is indeed ambiguous.
• Any syntactically-inconsistent theory has no model either.

The graph is a pair of hyperbolas, one in the first quadrant representing all the positive solutions, and one in the third quadrant representing the negative solutions. — fishfry

... if a countable first-order theory has an infinite model, then for every infinite cardinal number κ it has a model of size κ, and that no first-order theory with an infinite model can have a unique model up to isomorphism. As a consequence, first-order theories are unable to control the cardinality of their infinite models. — Wikipedia on Löwenheim–Skolem theorem

Can we revive or perhaps review our philosophy ?
Even from the very dawn of the enlightenment age ? — David Jones

Where would Christianity be had Jesus not died on a cross? — Jacob-B

And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. — Quran 4:157–158

Benjamin Urrutia, Latter-Day-Saint and co-author of The Logia of Yeshua: The Sayings of Jesus, agrees with a theory in biblical scholarship[15] which says that Yeshua Bar Abba or Jesus Barabbas may have been none other than Jesus of Nazareth, and that the choice between two prisoners is not historical. Despite this, early scholars, such as Origen, found it unlikely that the story was fictional, pointing out that the incident occurred with a decision between two people with extremely similar names, as having such a similar name to Jesus by appending Yeshua to Barabbas would have been heretical, which is evidenced in some manuscripts by the removal of the common name Yeshua from Barabbas in order to differentiate between him and Jesus Christ. — Wikipedia on Origen's forgery of the name 'Barabbas'

How are you doing that? Color and all. — TheMadFool

I think this doesn't follow. — TheMadFool

Clearly F(x)>G(x) — Wittgenstein

defined    F(x)       G(x)
1 - 30      no         yes
31 - 90     no          no
>= 91       yes        no

Cutting out the slack, I'm pointing out that the private language argument shows that the world hypothesised in the OP cannot happen. Language is essentially social. — Banno

#!/usr/bin/env lua

print("hello world")
print("I can correctly parse this. What would there be social about me?")

Logic validates reasoning as a specific epistemology* validates the assumptions from which we reason. — jambaugh

Many of the first order theories described above can be extended to complete recursively enumerable consistent theories. This is no longer true for most of the following theories; they can usually encode both multiplication and addition of natural numbers, and this gives them enough power to encode themselves, which implies that Gödel's incompleteness theorem applies and the theories can no longer be both complete and recursively enumerable (unless they are inconsistent). — Wikipedia: List of first-order theories

Mathematics is the recognition of patterns - no patterns, no maths., — Banno

Nope. Analogies are inductive. Comparing the natives to the Pilgrims to the words of Jesus is not deductive. — Noah Te Stroete

Among Sunni traditions, there is still a range of attitudes regarding the validity of analogy as a method of jurisprudence. Imam Bukhari, Ahmad bin Hanbal, and Dawud al-Zahiri for example, rejected the use of analogical reason outright, arguing that to rely on personal opinion in law-making would mean that each individual would ultimately form their own subjective conclusions.[11][5][12] Bernard G. Weiss, one of today's foremost experts on Islamic law and philosophy, explains that while analogical reason was accepted as a fourth source of law by later generations, its validity was not a foregone conclusion among earlier Muslim jurists.[13] Thus, while its status as a fourth source of law was accepted by the majority of later and modern Muslim jurists, this was not the case at the inception of Muslim jurisprudence as a field. — Wikipedia on the epistemology of Islamic jurisprudence

You’re being pedantic. It is clear from the Gospels what were the words of Jesus and what were the words of the authors. What did Jesus say? Who better reflects this? You’re getting into some sort of pedagogical pedantry that is besides the point and is a total waste of our time. — Noah Te Stroete

It probably is, as is most of the tenets of faith of the various denominations. — Noah Te Stroete

What did Jesus actually say about God, God’s commandments, and about himself? Who better personifies what he said? The natives or the pilgrims? — Noah Te Stroete

Apparently you’ve never heard of the probably hundreds of Protestant denominations who believe that the entire Bible is the divine Word of God, passed down to humanity through God’s will? — Noah Te Stroete

Protestants aren’t taught about the Council of Nicaea and if they know about it, they would just say that God’s will was done. — Noah Te Stroete

In 325, the First Council of Nicaea adopted the Nicene Creed which described Christ as "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father", and the "Holy Ghost" as the one by which was incarnate... of the Virgin Mary".[56][57] — Wikipedia on the trinity

Protestants who adhere to the Nicene Creed believe in three persons (God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit) as one God. Movements emerging around the time of the Protestant Reformation, but not a part of Protestantism, e.g. Unitarianism also reject the Trinity. — Wikipedia on Protestantism and Trinity

And the various churches all believe that their different and varied tenets of faith do indeed come from Scripture. — Noah Te Stroete

As I understand it, there are different sects of Jews (the Reformed and the Orthodox as examples) — Noah Te Stroete

there are the Sunni and Shia Muslims. The two Muslim factions have been at odds for centuries. — Noah Te Stroete

Plus, there is the Wahabbists, too. — Noah Te Stroete

You are not saying there isn’t Church dogma, are you? — Noah Te Stroete

I’m not talking about religious dogma taken from the Bible that was sanctioned by the corrupt Roman Catholic Church that all Christian church denominations also use as their sacred text. Dogmatic bullshit is what it is full of. — Noah Te Stroete

I can only surmise that it is due to a cultural difference. — Punshhh