Re: virus: Incredulity

David McFadzean (
Thu, 06 Mar 1997 19:47:21 -0700

At 09:33 PM 06/03/97 EST, Wright, James 7929 wrote:

>Why should a benevolent deity wish to end human suffering? Suffering is
>part of the path which can generate new understanding. Without an
>occasional pain or torment, it is doubtful that humans would develop any
>sharper or greater intellect than bovines.

OK, substitute "wants to end human suffering" for benevolent.

>Premise #3 begs itself: end by destroying humans and thereby human
>suffering, or end by destroying suffering and stultify human development.

Well that wasn't the intent. Any syllogism will do, I just picked
what I thought was an amusing one. Here's a boring one:

1. G exists (proposition)
2. If G exists then not S (axiom/definition)
3. But S is true (empirical statement)
4. Therefore G doesn't exist.

The reason 4 holds true is we *can't imagine* (incredulity argument) how
1-3 can be simultaneously true because they lead to a logical contradiction.

David McFadzean       
Memetic Engineer      
Church of Virus