Quote# 73534

[Note from the Mods: We are aware the original material has been removed at the source location. However, this quote was personally verified by us when it was still in PubAd, and at that time it had not been removed. Because of this, the quote stays. Please stop PMing the mods about it.]



Mathematics Requires Morality

The use of mathematics demands morality. Disclaim God and His moral law and there is no obligation to affirm that two plus two equal four, and that "A" cannot be "A" and "non-A" at the same time, in the same way. "Must" I affirm mathematical or logical truth? If so, I must provide objective unchanging moral grounds for the obligation, and that requires an unchanging God. For two plus three not to be four, anywhere at any time, requires a universal truth: which presupposes an all-knowing God (who supplies the moral law). God's law commands all men to tell the truth and forbids lying. This is the reason we "ought" to affirm two plus three equal five.

Presupposing God as the solution to all questions and the standard for truth does not mean that we must construct a theological postulate just to perform mundane tasks. Yet every simple task and every piece of routine communication presupposes the triune God because we use logic and morality in all those endeavors. God is the precondition for all logic and morality. If we presuppose anything other than God as our starting point, we end up with absurd and contradictory affirmations. The tri-unity of God--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit--is inescapable if we want to make sense out of our world. To reject the triune God is to end up asserting your own philosophical demise. Deny God and you commit logical suicide.

Mike A. Robinson, Amazon.com 146 Comments [6/3/2010 8:33:20 PM]
Fundie Index: 224
Username:
Comment:



1 2 3 4 5 6 | bottom

Byne

So.... you only believe 2+2=4 because God exists?

Clearly somewhere along the line the school system has failed you.

Also, inb4 MATHEMATICS DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY

6/3/2010 8:36:09 PM

huntress

No, the reason we ought to affirm that two plus three equals five is because we'd get a bad grade on our math test otherwise.

6/3/2010 8:41:19 PM

louislois

What? I don't even...

6/3/2010 8:41:54 PM

deadreckoning

Hey look, its an religious dumbass trying to sound like hes NOT a dumbass. But we all know "God" has nothing to do with morality, mathematics, and least of all logic.

6/3/2010 8:42:10 PM

Mudak

The words appear to be in the English language but I don't understand a single word of it...

English, motherfucker. Do you speak it?

6/3/2010 8:44:58 PM

ZugTheMegasaurus

...the fuck?

6/3/2010 8:48:27 PM

D Laurier.

What the fuck?

6/3/2010 9:00:45 PM



I really hope this is a Poe. Otherwise, we have a fundy who completely lacks any basic reasoning and observational skills.

6/3/2010 9:05:08 PM

dionysus

The use of mathematics demands morality.

Try telling that to a loan shark when he's calculating how much you owe him. By the way, as a heads up you might want to order your prosthetic knees right now.

God's law commands all men to tell the truth and forbids lying. This is the reason we "ought" to affirm two plus three equal five.

No, we need math to stay consistent for it to be a useful tool for both describing the world and for trade. If everyone made up their own amounts willy-nilly, currency would be worthless, so would bartering, etc. Indeed, civilization itself would collapse and that's NOT a hyperbole as civilization depends on trade. Also, we tend not to tolerate liars because they devalue information by spreading false information, which is kind of like counterfeiting devaluing currency. No god is required for any of this, just the desire to have useful trade and useful language.

6/3/2010 9:06:33 PM

BobsOldSocks

Begging the question.

6/3/2010 9:06:59 PM

Zoo

"For two plus three not to be four, anywhere at any time, requires a universal truth"

You mean the universal truth (that doesn't require any god) that if you put two objects and three more objects in a pile and then count them there are more than four?

"God is the precondition for all logic and morality. If we presuppose anything other than God as our starting point, we end up with absurd and contradictory affirmations"

Could you give an example?

6/3/2010 9:08:17 PM

Tyler

What

6/3/2010 9:08:30 PM

konrad

I think I'm going to need a new WTF meter.

6/3/2010 9:21:57 PM



okay, assuming that for 2+2 to equal 4, you must have god (which can be done, it just requires a few shaky assumptions in the logic), why is it the christian "triune"? why not any other deity from humanity's history? or ones that haven't been thought up?

6/3/2010 9:24:12 PM

fffffffuuuuu

It seems like he was trying to use the T.A.G. argument but he has clearly failed on many levels.

6/3/2010 9:28:41 PM

ME

The use of mathematics demands morality. Disclaim FSM and Her moral law and there is no obligation to affirm that two plus two equal four, and that "A" cannot be "A" and "non-A" at the same time, in the same way. "Must" I affirm mathematical or logical truth? If so, I must provide objective unchanging moral grounds for the obligation, and that requires an unchanging FSM. For two plus three not to be four, anywhere at any time, requires a universal truth: which presupposes an all-knowing FSM (who supplies the moral law). FSM's law commands all men to tell the truth and forbids lying. This is the reason we "ought" to affirm two plus three equal five. ....



See how easy that is? Using your own (ill) logic I just "proved" the FSM. You cannot any longer deny her/him and must at once praise her/his noodliness.

EDIT: I just read the original page. WOW what a bunch of fail. The book seems to claim math is perfect because god is. Really? Then why does "god" say pi is 3?... FAIL

6/3/2010 9:31:03 PM

Jesus Christ Himself

I think I'll just third "...the fuck?"

6/3/2010 9:35:19 PM

TGRwulf

What the FUCK? Huge word salad and an absolute mathmatics fail.

6/3/2010 9:36:59 PM

the_ignored

I've seen this kind of "reasoning" before, by some guy named "Sye TenB".

He gets dissected here

6/3/2010 9:42:41 PM

parable

Wait, so...morality is the basis for our ascribing characters to the concept of a given amount of a thing (and then later to the idea of amount or number)?
How about, you know, logically being able to describe your world?
...Mathematics are simply a process by which you explain the measurements of things. It's amoral by nature and design.

6/3/2010 9:50:01 PM

Philbert McAdamia

>...two plus two equal four, and that "A" cannot be "A" and "non-A" at the same time, <

And then there's algebra, the devil's arithmetic.

6/3/2010 9:51:39 PM

dionysus

@#1164356

okay, assuming that for 2+2 to equal 4, you must have god (which can be done, it just requires a few shaky assumptions in the logic), why is it the christian "triune"? why not any other deity from humanity's history? or ones that haven't been thought up?

Because that's the god Mike A. Robinson's mother told him about when he was a kid so therefore it must be true.

6/3/2010 9:53:23 PM

Professor M

Funny, here I thought that deviating from the basic principles and/or postulates of math or logic leads to often-fascinating (for us geeks) alternate systems of math, logic/metalogic, etc. Sometimes these alternate versions are actually useful for mapping out abstract and fairly non-intuitive (or semiotically "messy" or "fuzzy") systems.

But of course, even imagining the possibility of different forms of math and logic makes me a tool of Satan, I suppose.

6/3/2010 10:13:39 PM



Some things are easy to understand. You take two bananas from a bunch of two, you're left with two bananas in the bunch. It's simple because you can see it, touch it and it happens exactly the same way every time.

Other things are less easy to understand, such as someone asserting that there's only two bananas left because an invisible, inaudible, untouchable, omniscient construct makes it so.

I think I'll munch my (perfectly fashioned for my hand by a triune God?) bananas and ponder the question of how Mike A. Robinson managed to get this far in life without suffering a fatal idiocy overdose.

6/3/2010 10:28:02 PM





6/3/2010 10:30:57 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 | top: comments page