When I was in U of A, some professor chated in the coffee room, "Two things we don't argue: tradition and religion." I think it was a very wise comment.
原帖由 eastroster 于 2006-6-4 01:03 发表, R* L( D$ T6 ?- n
When I was in U of A, some professor chated in the coffee room, "Two things we don't argue: tradition and religion." I think it was a very wise comment.
tomgod Vs dora --- a debate in logistics, y: A% H6 e) H- q# l; p2 ?+ o' ]
+ X# C5 S% j7 k, ydora believes: 上帝无所不能, while tomgod does not. 5 }" v K1 A% z4 F8 M" t$ T8 H
Then tomgod tried to overthrow dora's conclusion (上帝无所不能) by finding one thing that 上帝 can not do. tomgod asked dora a tricky question (a puzzle):( g7 R/ v: H: O7 ?6 @8 _, Z
"上帝能否造一块他(她/它)都不能举起的石头????" ) Y6 E" @% v+ F! x2 l $ T/ V8 ]* t7 ^4 I+ h3 ^0 PIt seemed that dora would be in a deep trap. 5 W2 T- b+ Q: F. w' J3 }7 RIf dora answered YES, then there would a 石头上帝不能举起 --> 上帝 is not 无所不能 ! r4 e4 u# ~5 c9 I, c' RIf dora answered No, then --> 上帝 is not 无所不能 . d; k% K2 A- }( a; ^" [9 rEither of these two answer would lead to " 上帝 is not 无所不能" `, ]0 ]2 y. F# x' p ; k" W3 x) ?# h However dora did not follow the usual way of thinking into tomgod's trap. dora's answer was as the following: "上帝都不能举起的石头"不存在, which means that the queston is a fake one: ]5 |4 ]* F7 Q1 c
' S- s# b: C. T3 i- v# ~) P$ z
If the question is a fake how can you expect there should be a simple Yes or No answer for the wrong question?7 i& m% P. z+ H: D1 F( A. \
8 C* } y& I' @( c6 e4 j2 N9 l
Thats why I made a comment from the logic point of view "Dora's 逻辑 is correct." 5 m! ?" M- ?; i! c' B, ?0 Z $ }( _( S5 E4 B. a[ 本帖最后由 eastroster 于 2006-6-5 07:49 编辑 ]