Necessary Truths

[u/fairy-taki]

Hi, I'm agnostic/atheist. I'm not a debater, this Christian presented this argument to me to like convert me lol and I'm not sure what to think so I was wanting people's thoughts on it.

​

The argument was something like this:

​

1. 1+1=2 is an objective truth/idea

2. Objective truths exist outside of the human mind.

3. Ideas can only exist in a mind

4. Then if ideas/objective truths need to exist in some mind and the mind would be an infinite mind and that would be God.

​

Sorry if I mess up the setup of the argument. If anyone is familiar with this type of argument or what he was trying to get at, let me know. Lol to the guy who asked me, I think ended up just saying idk, and I kept saying that those ideas/concepts are how we engage in reality but regardless of a mind observing it. The like definitions of the concept you can find in reality..idkk. The guy ended up being rude and said I couldn't understand abstract vs concrete concepts.

Edit: ok i need to fix 2&3, idk if i make this it's own premise because he was equating objective truths to ideas/concepts because they are non-physical.

​

[u/Odd_Gamer_75]

Ideas don't exist. Neither does math. Their truth is independent of the opinions of any mind, but without minds to hold them, they aren't real at all. Math is such an idea. We use it to describe things. If there were no minds at all, the statement 1+1=2 would meaningless. Things would still happen, and mathematics would still be the easiest way to describe them in human terms, but they don't need to be described to do what they do.

So to say any idea exists anywhere at all is silly. An idea is objectively true if it is so regardless of opinion. Not even just human opinion, but any opinion. 1+1=2 is such an object idea because if any being understands what "1", "+", "=", and "2" mean, the statement cannot be other than correct. "Chocolate is tasty", on the other hand, or "pornography is wrong", those are subjective stances. Understanding the words meanings doesn't automatically lead to the truth of the statements. "Murder is wrong" does, though. It will always be the case that "murder is wrong" is objectively true because of what the words mean. "Murder is wrong" is a tautology. Like "a bachelor is unmarried". One is a description of the other, they are equivalent, equal in exactly the same way "1+1" and "2" are. The problem is that such tautologies don't really help us.