Theory of Reason in Life

[Mise]

Theory to Reason in Life​

The mind has two ways of determining logic. They are reasoning and rationality. You will have to use reasoning to follow it as it is philosophy. Thus, seems irrational but it is not. Just try following it. I promise it stays within reason of the human mind's capabilities. How could it not?

Rationality: The view of mankind's "falsafiables" in science.
Reasoning: The view of mankind's truth in religion.
Logic: The communication of reason to rationality.

People that find truth in rationality seek proof that round off only to things that can be disproved only. Reasoning rounds up to things that can be proved but not disproved. This is where the mind communicates through logic. You have the ability to round up or down on anything you wish to in life.

But communication with others get lost through logic by this. Because the more you use reason, the less you use rational. And the more you use rational, the less you use reason.

None of this makes any sense... I mean I'm trying to find some kind of content here but it's all just gibberish.

 

[King Flevance]

Yeah, Mise I can understand that. Please, everyone just give me time to logically construct the theory. I will provide evidence as I do it. I need time and I am making sure the bases are covered. Please ignore the theory if you wish while I finish constructing it. I apologize for not having the theory hold self-evident yet. I cannot see into everyone's minds at once. It can only stand self-evident to those who can put faith in it. Otherwise it can only be 99% unprovable. After that, I can do no more for you. Your faith in Jesus is the last 1% and will be what guides you as well as how much truth you hold in this thread.

If you can give Jesus 1% faith, this theory will stand to reason. Please show faith in Jesus to have this theory reveal truth. If you cannot give Jesus even the benefit of the doubt, then you are on your own in regards to what I can show you with this theory. I admit it seems off right now, but it will not in the end.

 

[newfangle]

Your definitions of reasoning and rationality are bizarre, and so is your conception of what it means for something to be logical. I recommend a dictionary and/or a logic class.

I will have to agree.

As soon as I read the opening definitions, the theory became so murky and irrational it felt very much like church. And if church has taught me anything, its that whatever you learn in church is stupid. (ha!)

 

[Atropos]

The only part which seemed coherent in the original post is that religion deals with what can be proved but not disproved.

There are no such theses. Read Popper.

For a theory to be considered proven, it must be falsifiable, i.e. susceptible to being disproven.

 

[King Flevance]

The definitions may seem off. I can see how it may be possible. But you guys are looking into my reasoning right now. Please give me time. I have to logically build this from alot of new information I got handed all at once. Please give me time. I have arational life as well, and it distracts me from being able to always be on the boards working on this.
I cannot see you're guy's reasoning capabilities. So, all I can do is reveal my own. I will also be revealing my rationality. But I need the "prove the theory wrong thread" to let me see you guy's rationality so I can interpret better.

I promise I won't judge anyone. If it appears I am, call me out on it - but only in the other thread. I am trying to relate to you guys as hard as I can.
All I need is trust that I MIGHT hold some truth in the possibilities in this thread. And a little faith that Jesus is possibly the savior of mankind.

 

[King Flevance]

The only part which seemed coherent in the original post is that religion deals with what can be proved but not disproved.

There are no such theses. Read Popper.

For a theory to be considered proven, it must be falsifiable, i.e. susceptible to being disproven.

There is but you must be able to hold the possibility that there is truth in religion.

The whole "For a theory to be considered proven, it must be falsifiable, i.e. susceptible to being disproven" means you will only ever believe in possibly false things in your life Atroprose. There is truth in here once I can dig it all out to be seen. I am going to try and show you. But in the end, it is your decision to believe it or not.

 

[QuoVadisNation]

Aren't those definitions of 'reasoning' and 'rationality' taken from somewhere else? I really want to say that it is, but I can't pinpoint where you got it from.

Dude, I understand what you're trying to say. Pretty much, you're trying to say that 'reasoning' is the true median for processed truth, is that right? I hate to tell you, but you're presupposing that your particular reasoning (Christianity) is 'true'. I can make a full-blown lie that technically can't be disproved empirically, does that make it true? No, it doesn't.

Finding truth by culling out the distruths is a much better way to find truth than by simply assuming one truth to be the truth.

Don't get me wrong, I'm Christian. But your presupposing everything that matters.

edit: When it comes down to it, we can't prove anything. It all comes down to a big fat "we don't know, we just think we know".

 

[King Flevance]

I do not mean to say that my reasoning is the only one that is right. I promise I am not. That's why it is a theory. I am trying to show people a new viewpoint in life. Nothing more.

I KNOW Jesus is in my life and that he is going to save me so long as I work on myself. I am trying to show anyone willing to listen how I know this. Please give me time.

Finding truth by culling out the distruths is a much better way to find truth than by simply assuming one truth to be the truth.

This is why I need time. I cannot instantly give people a good theory out of nowhere. I must use logic to set it up and then present it. I am just letting everyone know what I am working on. And to please have an open mind that Jesus is their savior. How is that harmful?

 

[QuoVadisNation]

Flevance, I appreciate the effort. (as I said, I'm Christian too. ) But I don't think you are going to be able to find an adequate answer. People for the past 2,000 years have already tried this.
Whatever you do, make sure you also focus your attention on other earthly matters just in case the first project doesn't hold up. Go into politics.

 

[Atropos]

There is but you must be able to hold the possibility that there is truth in religion.

Not only do I bear in mind the possibility that there is truth in religion, but I would consider myself to be religious. This is irrelevant.

The whole "For a theory to be considered proven, it must be falsifiable, i.e. susceptible to being disproven" means you will only ever believe in possibly false things in your life Atroprose.

You misunderstand the definition of "falsifiable."

I believe that this desk on which I am typing exists. I believe this because, if it did not exist, my computer would fall through. That's falsifiability.

"Falsifiable" does not mean "possibly false." On the contrary, as you can see from the above example, the fact that an idea is falsifiable adds considerably to its credibility. If everything I observe would be the same whether or not my desk exists, how can I tell that it is there? But the fact that, say, kicking it results in a stubbed toe means that I can be certain that it exists, as follows:

1. MY HYPOTHESIS: The desk exists.
2. THE NULL HYPOTHESIS (opposite of my hypothesis): The desk does not exist.
3. If (2) is accurate, then I cannot stub my toe my kicking violently in the supposed direction of the desk.
4. OUCH OUCH OUCH. Thus, (2) is inaccurate, meaning (1) must be accurate.

 

[King Flevance]

Now to add, my other thread was locked. That is fine but please allow this thread to only be about Christian philosophy then. The reason for the other thread was for atheists to have a say in the matter. But I guess they might be offended that I don't want them in this thread bogging down reasonable viewpoints. I don't mean that offensively at all. I just have an extremely reasonable mind I guess.
This isn't about judgement. It's about communication. So, if all the debate has to muck up this thread, so be it. Anyone can justify their own reasons in life. I can play by any rules presented to me now I think.

This is my last post, I have stuff to do today and don't feel like arguing. Sorry for not going into the definitions more today but I will later this week. This thread WILL be expanded upon.

 

[King Flevance]

Flevance, I appreciate the effort. (as I said, I'm Christian too. ) But I don't think you are going to be able to find an adequate answer. People for the past 2,000 years have already tried this.
Whatever you do, make sure you also focus your attention on other earthly matters just in case the first project doesn't hold up. Go into politics.

Indeed I will. I will go into many things. Anything anyone wants me to. I believe everything will stand to the theory of reason. I have faith it will. The last part is a little belief in Jesus.

Anyone who thinks I am a looney, please ignore this thread. I made a thread for you guys to call me wrong but someone shut it down. Which is fine by me because I don't care if you think I am wrong. This thread will be great for us christians in the end. Anyone that I have peaked their interest, stay tuned.

Please, do not post anymore about the definitions. You cannot prove your definitions are right so don't try to tell me why mine are wrong. I will be offline for a little bit and am out of town. I will go more into this this week and even more as time goes on.

Thanks.