Now in regard to circular reasoning, there is no circular reasoning when you transit from discussion to expedition, can't you get that into your brain cells?!
Someone says as though he has just discovered circular reasoning but altogether not grasping the genuine significance of circular reasoning, it is all circular when talkers don't go into an expedition but keep talking no end in discussion.
See later this my system for arguing God exists consisting of two phases, first phase discussion, second phase expedition.
So, a = a is circular if you don't ever proceed from discussion to expedition to locate an instance or every instance of a = a, in the concrete objective realm of reality i.e. existence outside discussion.
You see, when you go to the concrete objective world of reality in the realm of existence outside of discussion, a = a means the concept in a to the left is substantiated by an instance of a to the right, for example, I say a = a in discussion, meaning a to the left is the following:
God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning.
In a to the right I mean God in concrete actual reality in the realm of existence outside discussion:
There is i.e. exists God creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning
Can't you get that?!
If you guys don't notice it, time for you to get intelligent and know that discussion must always end up with execution or expedition, unless your issue is purely in the realm of plain possibilities without any instance of existence in the concrete real objective reality of existence outside your minds, dungeon-ed in discussion only, because there are no instances in reality outside your minds of the object of your discussion.
To verify whether there is at least one instance of existence in your discussion on possibilities, then go forth into the universe and look for it.
When you can't find it, then you can say so far as we have searched there is no instance of existence of the thing we talk about in our minds, or there is and we have found it!
Okay, read carefully my system for proving God exists, pay keen attention to the distinction between the discussion phase and the expedition phase -- and you are invited to show my system of argument to (have I made this kind of an invitation before?) logicians to get their critical comments on my system of argument.
So, for tomorrow I expect to read your contributions to a critique of infinite regress, and also on circular reasoning.
Annex
Argument for the existence (or non-existence) of God in concept the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning.
Quote:
I am presenting a more easy and simple to understand system for argument on the existence of God in concept the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning:
Okay, here is the procedure to prove God exists or does not exist: from the concept of God as creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning, by discussions on the concept of God, and by expeditions to search for God in the universe and/or even in the totality of existence.
Discussion phase
Step 1 -- For the sake of argument theists and atheists concur that God in concept is the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning.
Step 2 -- Theists concur among themselves that the universe has a beginning.
Step 3 -- Atheists concur among themselves that the universe has always existed.
Expedition phase
Step 4 -- Theists invite atheists to join them to proceed on an expedition in the universe to search for God in concept the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning, by looking for all instances of existence with a beginning and/or all instances of existence to have always existed.
Step 5 -- Atheists invite theists to join them to proceed on an expedition in the universe to search for God in concept the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning, by looking for all instances of existence to have always existed and/or all instances of existence to not have a beginning at all.
Step 6 -- Will theists find all instances of existence in the universe and also the universe as a whole to have a beginning, and cannot find any instance at all in the universe to have always existed: and conclude God exists as the creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning?
Step 7 -- Will atheists find all instances of existence in the universe to have always existed, in particular the universe as a whole has always existed, and cannot find any instance of existence that has not always existed: and conclude that God as creator and operator of the universe and everything with a beginning is not needed at all?
Take the nose in our face, it is a part of the universe, does it have a beginning or it has always existed?
Starting from the nose in our face all will proceed farther and on to the deepest depths of sub-atomic space and to the most distant stars at the nth distant fringes of the universe.
That is the way of expedition, while the way of discussion is the preliminary work in our minds to concur for the sake of argument on the concept of God and the ideas of universe with a beginning or universe has always existed.
Theists argue following in succession Steps: 1 2 4 6.
And atheists argue following in succession Steps: 1 3 5 7.
With critical comments from everyone here, we will revise my proposed argument system accordingly, so that when the conclusion is reached it will be accepted by everyone be he a theist or an atheist.
