How do we know that places like Narnia do not exist?

Goshawk said:
You cannot prove a negative, Ian. You can't prove that something does not exist--you can only prove that something does exist.

Thus your OP's point is kinda moot, IMO.

"How do we know that there isn't any such thing as Narnia?" We don't. There may be a Narnia somewhere, and it's just that nobody has come up with any proof of its existence yet. So what? [shrug]
Click to expand...

Dawkins stated it doesn't exist. If he has no arguments or evidence why should anyone believe him?


I'm sorry, I don't see where you're going with this, Ian. Did you just wanna shoot the breeze about the book, or the review, or Narnia, or Dawkins, or atheism, or what?
Click to expand...

Jus' wondered if there were any arguments against the existence of world's only accessible via magic, that's all. So there isn't?
 
Ian said:
Jus' wondered if there were any arguments against the existence of world's only accessible via magic, that's all. So there isn't?
Click to expand...
Okay, now I'm getting freaked out by the weird apostrophe stuff. You want to know if there are any arguments against the existence of places that can only be reached by magic. What does it mean to get someplace by magic?

~~ Paul
 
Interesting Ian said:
Dawkins stated it doesn't exist. If he has no arguments or evidence why should anyone believe him?

Jus' wondered if there were any arguments against the existence of world's only accessible via magic, that's all. So there isn't?
Click to expand...

If it makes you feel better, any time someone says something doesn't exist, you can presume they mean, "as far as is reasonably known to current human knowledge". But of course I don't know everything that could possibly be known. Is it really reasonable to make people always tack on, "but of course I don't know everything that could possibly be known." explicitly? That would make conversations a little lengthy... but of course I don't know everything that could possibly be known about conversations.
 
Outhere said:
If Narnia existed, it must be a place created by an Oxford don where no one uses an apostrophe other than to show possession (not the demonic kind) or as a contraction, as in It's for "it is." For god's sake, what is being taught in English classes these days, in this wicked world?
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ.

I was thinking he was called Dawkin and not Dawkins.

Having said that I certainly do not rate my English Language skills particularly highly. I can't remember ever getting taught any grammar, and if I did I certainly didn't listen. The only subjects I had any remote interest in at school were mathematics and physics. I scarcely ever listened in any other subject and I only passed in those 2 subjects. And I never did any homework for any subject. However, compared to the English Language skills of the average person on the Net I think you should devote your energy to criticising someone else.

Or you could actually make a stab at answering my question :rolleyes:
 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
Okay, now I'm getting freaked out by the weird apostrophe stuff. You want to know if there are any arguments against the existence of places that can only be reached by magic. What does it mean to get someplace by magic?

~~ Paul
Click to expand...

You know, by chanting spells or whatever.

The wardrobe which they went through to get into Narnia was made from the wood from an apple tree grown from an apple originally obtained from Narnia. Because the apple was obtained very shortly after Narnia was created by magic, the apple itself was magic. Thus the wardrobe made out of the tree grown from the apple might have had an affinity for where it ultimately originated from. Hence when the children entered the wardrobe they were pulled into Narnia (albeit only sometimes).
 
I get this weird image in my mind: Galilee, 32 A.D.

Listener: "Dawkin, is it right to--"

Jesus: "What did you call me?"

Listener: "Uh, Dawkin?"

Jesus: "Please don't call me that. You can call me Jesus Christ if you want."

Listener: "Jesus Christ." [Aside, to a disciple] "I thought he was called Dawkin."

Disciple: "He gets that a lot."
 
Interesting Ian said:
No they don't mean that. They mean what they say.
Click to expand...

Look, we might as well start arguing whether biblical events occured or not. There's no positive scientific evidence to be found, so it all boils down to faith.

What next, should we start questioning people who say dragons do not exist? :rolleyes:
 
Interesting Ian said:
Dawkins stated it doesn't exist.
Click to expand...
No: Dawkins' statement was that in his opinion, Narnia does not exist. He is in no position to make a definitive statement as to whether or not Narnia exists, because he has no evidence for the non-existence of Narnia, because you cannot have evidence that something does not exist. See? You can only have evidence that something exists. That's what the phrase "you cannot prove a negative" MEANS, Ian.

And just because someone says a thing does not exist, does not automatically make it not exist. Just because someone says there is no water on Mars does not automatically make there be no water on Mars. For decades we assumed, lacking evidence to the contrary, that there was no water on Mars, but we had no evidence that there was no water on Mars.
 
Is it really necessary to use the qualifier "as far as I know" following every single statement?

Ian, I will make the statement that there are no miniature twin brothers of Arnold Schwarzenegger living in your sock drawer, too small to be seen even by a scanning electron microscope.

As far as I know, anyway.

Do you require proof that such miniature Schwarzeneggers do not exist, or will you accept that as a safe bet, given what you know about the universe?
 
Interesting Ian said:
Dawkins stated it doesn't exist. If he has no arguments or evidence why should anyone believe him?
Click to expand...
Here's my POV.
I think Ian rightly pointed out that unless Richard Dawkins present strong arguement or evidence, his assertion have to be discounted.

Moveover, there is no necessity for me to rely so heavily of Richard Dawkins.
I rely on other sources of evidence.

Interesting Ian said:
Somebody is asserting that narnia type worlds do not exist; namely Richard Dawkins. I was wondering if he or anyone else can justify his assertion.
Click to expand...
I think I could.

Firstly, the context in real life is that there is a movie and book called "Narnia", featuring the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I would bet each one of us have had enough experience opening wardrobe, that we know there is no magical land within any wardrobe.

If it is that particular Wardrobe that is accessible to Narnia, it certainly exist within a movie studio. And I think no one has step forward to say such a really magic wardrobe exists.

There is no winning application to JREF million dollar challenge on the claim by anyone to own a wardrobe that goes to Narnia.
 
Last edited:
Bone_Vulture said:
I see no correlation. Where is your proof?
Click to expand...

People are a laugh a minute on here! None of you guys ever present any proof, so why is it I am always obliged to do so?

The evidence is suggestive in that people are focusing on irrelevant issues i.e my grammatical skills
 
JLam said:
Is it really necessary to use the qualifier "as far as I know" following every single statement?

Ian, I will make the statement that there are no miniature twin brothers of Arnold Schwarzenegger living in your sock drawer, too small to be seen even by a scanning electron microscope.

As far as I know, anyway.

Do you require proof that such miniature Schwarzeneggers do not exist, or will you accept that as a safe bet, given what you know about the universe?
Click to expand...

We know through experience of the world that this is unlikely.

Other worlds are certainly a tangible possiblity. We can't dictate what they must be like and so another world might or might not be similar to Narnia.

Reaching them by magic? I agree that this would be unlikely if it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that magic never works. Do you have any peer reviewed references?
 
Jyera said:
Firstly, the context in real life is that there is a movie and book called "Narnia", featuring the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I would bet each one of us have had enough experience opening wardrobe, that we know there is no magical land within any wardrobe.
Click to expand...

But the wardrobe was made from magic wood grown from a magic apple obtained from Narnia at the dawn of its birth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom