Starts at 18:20
Have the "YouTube philosophers" got it wrong?
This video provides my arguments and rationale why the current logic representation of - and thus the way people think about - the psychological state of being agnostic is wrong when considering the proposition p=a god exists.
I cover two aspects:
a) the illogical and irrational logic conclusion of representing agnosticism as ~bp AND ~b~p
b) how the YouTube philosophers end up in this position by producing their own non-standard and illogical definition of agnosticism while incorrectly maintaining they represent the precise definition as provided in the Stanford Enyclopaedia of Philosophy.
I challenge these philosophers, mathematicians and logicians to produce a coherent logical representation of the actual SEP definition, rather than make up their own definition that fits their illogical representation.
0 Comments