Quote (addone @ Apr 13 2026 11:21pm)

Are you winning son? Yes dad, addone made a spelling mistake, instead of quarts he said quartz this is funny because its spelled incorrectly. Son you are very funny don't let the haters tell you otherwise. *(Pats you on the head)



Why don't you add 2 quarts of water with 2 quarts of ethanol together and see if you still get 4 quarts of liquid. I'll wait

Spoiler alert it won't be 4 this disproves your assertion that 2+2=4 universally. Logic is an abstract immaterial concept and you are trying to apply to a dynamic complex world it doesn't always work. It only works in a vacuum with certain set of rules. You have at least 4 different types of logic to deal with problems (formal, informal, symbolic, and mathematical) precisely because they don't cover everything. Logic therefore cannot be called universal in a practical sense.

Now stop wasting my time talking about this meta conversation and get to the actual proof of your so called god. Not really interested in debating sophistry and theoretical philosophy.

Quote (addone @ Apr 14 2026 10:18am)

Logic is a man made (conceptual) tool not a law same way a hammer is also a tool (physical) not a law.

How does logic allow the hamer to function exactly? Logic is a man-made concept the hammer cannot be affected by immaterial concepts. Only physical force can affect the hammer such as you taking the hammer in your hand and swinging it. The hammer doesn't need justification for its existence it already exists. You can give it a name, you can even decide how to use the hammer or if certain people are allowed to use hammers but you cannot make a hammer appear out of thin air by putting an identity on it. You can only make the hammer physically out of existing materials.

In maths logic might appear to be universal since its mostly binary or controlled isolated variables but when you try to apply it to some complex human problem with million variables it doesn't really work. Especially when tradeoffs/compromises are involved.
2+2 =4 isnt universal it is just an commonly agreed term to maintain consistency within certain systems, but it is not an absolute law of the physical universe or all mathematical frameworks. Like language certain words are given meaning but the words themselves can be changed if the collective decides to update its lexicon. If tomorrow we decided 2+2=5 then that will be new logic not because it's some universal law. These are just tools that we can update and change any time just like designing a new and more ergonomic hammer.



Maths ain't mathing still believes bible anyway.

Thanks for confirming its a cult.

Quote (addone @ Apr 13 2026 08:21pm)

Are you winning son? Yes dad, addone made a spelling mistake, instead of quarts he said quartz this is funny because its spelled incorrectly. Son you are very funny don't let the haters tell you otherwise. *(Pats you on the head)



Why don't you add 2 quarts of water with 2 quarts of ethanol together and see if you still get 4 quarts of liquid. I'll wait

Spoiler alert it won't be 4 this disproves your assertion that 2+2=4 universally. Logic is an abstract immaterial concept and you are trying to apply to a dynamic complex world it doesn't always work. It only works in a vacuum with certain set of rules. You have at least 4 different types of logic to deal with problems (formal, informal, symbolic, and mathematical) precisely because they don't cover everything. Logic therefore cannot be called universal in a practical sense.

Now stop wasting my time talking about this meta conversation and get to the actual proof of your so called god. Not really interested in debating sophistry and theoretical philosophy.

Quote (addone @ Apr 13 2026 08:21pm)

Are you winning son? Yes dad, addone made a spelling mistake, instead of quarts he said quartz this is funny because its spelled incorrectly. Son you are very funny don't let the haters tell you otherwise. *(Pats you on the head)



Why don't you add 2 quarts of water with 2 quarts of ethanol together and see if you still get 4 quarts of liquid. I'll wait

Spoiler alert it won't be 4 this disproves your assertion that 2+2=4 universally. Logic is an abstract immaterial concept and you are trying to apply to a dynamic complex world it doesn't always work. It only works in a vacuum with certain set of rules. You have at least 4 different types of logic to deal with problems (formal, informal, symbolic, and mathematical) precisely because they don't cover everything. Logic therefore cannot be called universal in a practical sense.

Now stop wasting my time talking about this meta conversation and get to the actual proof of your so called god. Not really interested in debating sophistry and theoretical philosophy.

Quote (addone @ Apr 13 2026 08:21pm)

Are you winning son? Yes dad, addone made a spelling mistake, instead of quarts he said quartz this is funny because its spelled incorrectly. Son you are very funny don't let the haters tell you otherwise. *(Pats you on the head)



Why don't you add 2 quarts of water with 2 quarts of ethanol together and see if you still get 4 quarts of liquid. I'll wait

Spoiler alert it won't be 4 this disproves your assertion that 2+2=4 universally. Logic is an abstract immaterial concept and you are trying to apply to a dynamic complex world it doesn't always work. It only works in a vacuum with certain set of rules. You have at least 4 different types of logic to deal with problems (formal, informal, symbolic, and mathematical) precisely because they don't cover everything. Logic therefore cannot be called universal in a practical sense.

Now stop wasting my time talking about this meta conversation and get to the actual proof of your so called god. Not really interested in debating sophistry and theoretical philosophy.

Quote (El1te @ Apr 14 2026 03:34pm)

Your example is like saying "If I have a 1 piece of paper, but then I burn it it's gone haha so 1 = 0". Completely nonsensical. Dissolution is a chemical reaction, either producing or consuming heat, to create an entirely different substance with different (very measurable) physical properties, one such property being density.

Quote (addone @ Apr 14 2026 01:21am)

Dad addone combined 2 liquids and they didn't add together because of chemical reaction. Son you cant use logic on liquids, only on rocks tell addone he is dumb (*pats on the head)

Also why don't you demonstrate how smart you are by burning a piece of paper and dont tell him what you are measuring that will show him.

Quote (majorblood @ Apr 14 2026 05:14pm)

2+2=4 isn't true because density exists? this is the lowest tier of argumentation I have ever heard.

for your example to even make sense, you have to assume the universal identity of 2+2=4 as a benchmark. you are literally using the law of identity in a failed attempt to disprove it.

every "type" of logic necessarily has the law of identity, this is the universal law of logic I keep referring to that you are dancing away from with your sophistry. if you can't even admit that a thing is itself, then you've abandoned reason entirely and your request for "physical proof" is meaningless

Quote (Shadowoffury @ Apr 14 2026 05:47pm)

I've never seen anyone with a worse grasp on science than you, including small children. It's sad that you're letting ai do this to your brain.

Quote (CPK001 @ Apr 14 2026 03:25pm)

I understand now, you do not use that organ that is in-between your ears. Did you know that a man who doesn't read has no advantage over a man who can't read?

Quote (addone @ Apr 14 2026 01:53am)

How is providing physical proof meaningless? It literally gives meaning to the thing you are claiming. Without proof your claims of a deity are pure fantasy.

You know exact what is being asked of you yet you trying to weasel your way out. If a cop asks you for licence and registration you don't give him lip and engage in philosophical meta conversation about ontological rocks, epistemology, law of identity or any of the other abstract immaterial concepts. You simply provide the required proof of id or say you don't have it.

There are no other options. Stonewalling and deflecting will result in you getting arrested and or tazed.
You know you dont have any proof of your made up god so you instead want to debate in unrelated philosophical meta conversation. I suggest go start a new thread where you can explore that to your heart's content. Here you provide proof or gtfo.



I've never seen you provide proof of god. Only nitpick a meme that hurt your feeling and throw adhominems. Do better.

https://imgur.com/60k4Aun.jpeg



These uncontructive insults won't do you any favors.
Come back when you can explain judas with 2 contradictory accounts

https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=107619089&f=119&p=688398465