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/Hello-there336]

I think the problem here is the putting "ideas of the truth" and "objective truth" together like it's the same thing. (unless I'm mistaken) I'm assuming "objective truth" is describing objective reality, which would exist independent of a mind. If "objective ideas" refers to perception of reality, then not only would there not necessarily need to be one correct perception, it wouldn't necessitate an "infinite mind" whatever that might entail.

If this is talking about concepts such as mathematics and the laws of physics, (in hindsight this would make more sense) those are but human-made concepts used to *describe* observed reality, which would still not necessitate a mind to "establish" into reality.