Question

...
Jason Mathias

Ambiguity? Non sequitur?

1. Angels are just products of mind so they don't exist

2. Everything is a product of mind.

3. Therefore angels are real.

asked on Saturday, Aug 14, 2021 02:02:53 PM by Jason Mathias

Top Categories Suggested by Community

Comments
...
1
Arlo writes:

This series of statements seems to provide a non sequitur .  

Premise 1 seems to imply that products of the mind are things that don't exist.  Premise 2 states everything is a product of mind.  

If products of the mind don't exist and if everything is a product of the mind, then the logical conclusion would be that nothing exists .... not that one particular product of the mind does exist.

posted on Sunday, Aug 15, 2021 01:23:11 PM
...
0
Jason Mathias writes:
[To Arlo]

Well, it doesn't say that "just" angels exist. 

[ login to reply ] posted on Sunday, Aug 15, 2021 09:31:45 PM
...
0
Jason Mathias writes:
[To Jason Mathias ]

It assumes product of mind in premise one is same as premise two when premise one defines it as hallucination and premise two defines it as preception or worldview so it is ambiguity

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Aug 17, 2021 06:46:33 AM

Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."

Bo's Book Bundle

Get all EIGHT of Bo's printed books, all autographed*. Save over $50!

* This offer is for residents of United States and Canada only.

Get the Book Bundle

Answers

...
TrappedPrior (RotE)
2

P1) Angels are just products of the mind

Implicit P) Products of the mind do not exist

Implicit P) Angels do not exist

P2) Everything is a product of the mind

C) Angels exist

We assert that angels are part of category X, then say category X contains things which don't really exist. We then try to claim that angels do in fact exist. This is contradictio in adjecto - an inconsistent set of premises which cannot jointly be true! If angels do not exist, they cannot exist and vice versa.

Next, there's an ambiguity fallacy in the sense that 'products of the mind' and 'existence' are not clearly defined. Does 'product of the mind' refer to perceptions such as anger or sadness (which can be argued to be 'real') or just concepts like unicorns (which are not 'real', at least, materially)? This makes the premises questionable. This is fallacious because we lump things for which there is actual evidence with things widely known to be supernatural (and thus unlikely to exist), like angels, when these are in fact very different.
answered on Saturday, Aug 14, 2021 04:16:59 PM by TrappedPrior (RotE)

TrappedPrior (RotE) Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
Dr. Richard
0

This is so vague I have no idea what it is about.

answered on Sunday, Aug 15, 2021 08:11:23 AM by Dr. Richard

Dr. Richard Suggested These Categories

Comments
...
0
account no longer exists writes:

It says that angels aren't real because they are products of mind but everything is a product of mind and it is considered real so angels exist.

posted on Tuesday, Aug 17, 2021 04:04:55 AM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:
[To Lynx Ssss]

False premises from start to finish, sounds like a solipsist, and that leads to a false conclusion. 

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Aug 17, 2021 04:16:28 AM
...
0
account no longer exists writes:

[To Dr. Richard]

I don't think they have false premises, Since in premise one it isn't clearly stated what they meant by product of mind it is stated as hallucination it can be imagination, so many meaning exists and in premise two again it isn't clearly defined what does product of mind mean when we say everything is product of mind mean ,it is defined as worldview or perception. So it is ambiguity fallacy since it assumes that product of mind in premise one is same as premise two when multiple meanings exist

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Aug 17, 2021 06:42:27 AM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:
[To Lynx Ssss]

I, unfortunately, do not see an explanation that does not require me to make assumptions as to meaning when I have no idea what you mean. Sorry, I miss the point by so much.

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Aug 17, 2021 01:54:07 PM
...
0
account no longer exists writes:
[To Dr. Richard]

1. Angels doesn't exist because they are product of mind.

2. Everything is a product of mind.

3. Therefore angels exist

The problem is that when people say angels doesn't exist because they are product of mind,

they define product of mind as hallucination, imagination.

And when people say everything is product of mind they define it as worldview, perception.

So the agrument commits ambiguity fallacy because it assumes that product of mind when used for Angels is same as product of mind when used for everything.

[ login to reply ] posted on Tuesday, Aug 17, 2021 09:49:50 PM
...
0
Dr. Richard writes:
[To Lynx Ssss]

In #1 you have a premise and an argument. You need to refine your proposed syllogism. Worse, you have false premise #2. 

[ login to reply ] posted on Wednesday, Aug 18, 2021 01:56:10 AM
...
Dr. Richard
0

This is not a valid argument. The conclusion clearly does not follow from the premises. How can "...are real" follow from "...don't exist?"

answered on Sunday, Aug 22, 2021 05:17:46 PM by Dr. Richard

Dr. Richard Suggested These Categories

Comments