this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2024
478 points (95.1% liked)

Cool Guides

4736 readers
1 users here now

Rules for Posting Guides on Our Community

1. Defining a Guide Guides are comprehensive reference materials, how-tos, or comparison tables. A guide must be well-organized both in content and layout. Information should be easily accessible without unnecessary navigation. Guides can include flowcharts, step-by-step instructions, or visual references that compare different elements side by side.

2. Infographic Guidelines Infographics are permitted if they are educational and informative. They should aim to convey complex information visually and clearly. However, infographics that primarily serve as visual essays without structured guidance will be subject to removal.

3. Grey Area Moderators may use discretion when deciding to remove posts. If in doubt, message us or use downvotes for content you find inappropriate.

4. Source Attribution If you know the original source of a guide, share it in the comments to credit the creators.

5. Diverse Content To keep our community engaging, avoid saturating the feed with similar topics. Excessive posts on a single topic may be moderated to maintain diversity.

6. Verify in Comments Always check the comments for additional insights or corrections. Moderators rely on community expertise for accuracy.

Community Guidelines

By following these rules, we can maintain a diverse and informative community. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for contributing responsibly!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The premise written from the perspective of a bunch of Bronze Age shepherds, yes.

Which is precisely what the Epicurean paradox is about.

Mate I'm sorry but if you still don't understand what the paradox says in the first place this is a waste of time. Obviously you want to talk about something that hast nothing to do with the paradox itself. I'll leave you to it.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Which is precisely what the Epicurean paradox is about.

The paradox assumes a much more substantive understanding of philosophy in its axioms.

Mate I’m sorry but if you still don’t understand what the paradox says

Right back at you.

[–] Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The paradox assumes a much more substantive understanding of philosophy in its axioms.

How is that an counterargument? Epicurus says: Those axioms create a paradox, they must be wrong. You're saying: Yeah well your axioms are too substantive. You are agreeing that the three premises can't be true. Everything else you've talked about was simply missing the point.

The Epicurean paradox does nothing else than to discuss if the premises as phrased can be true. If you talk about an idea outside those premises you've already missed the mark.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How is that an counterargument?

The Epicurian rebuttal to the Bronze Age understanding of omniscience can be resolved by asserting "God is less omniscient than we thought". That's it. And there are plenty of readings of Old Testament that imply the Abrahamic God isn't perfectly omniscient. Hell, the Garden of Eden myth asserts God isn't perfectly omniscient.

The Epicurean paradox does nothing else than to discuss if the premises as phrased can be true.

It asserts a paradox of infinities, rather than a non-existence of God.

[–] Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It asserts a paradox of infinities, rather than a non-existence of God.

It never attempted to prove non-existence. This is what you misunderstood from the beginning.