Atheists: Can you construct a logical proof that kumquats exist?

Why or why not?

Atheists: Can you construct a logical proof that kumquats exist?
Doubtful. Only in mathematics can you prove anything.
Reply:The existence of kumquats is an empirical question, thus, empirical proof is relevant. I ignored the phrase "logical proof" as it was ambiguous: if you meant "proof using only logic" then your question was absurd, if you meant "logically strong proof" then the word 'logical' was unnecessary. Report It

Reply:Still wondering what your point was. Report It

Reply:No. Objects are not what we tend to think they are. Our perceptions are fallible. Some things are subject to logic, like God can't be omniscient and surprised.
Reply:They are tactile, unlike God, therefore easily proved through empirical data. Further, they can be percieved by olfactory sences, tasted by the tastebuds, and digested.





G=0


K=1
Reply:I have eaten a kumquat. Ergo, a kumquat exists.
Reply:I don't have to because I don't care whether you believe in them or not! ( I have no need, benefit or mandate to convert you!)
Reply:O. K. so there is empirical proof that a kumquat exists.





What else do you need to prove the kumquats existence?





Why do you need logical proof if there is empirical proof?





It is established that kumquats exist.





There is no evidence that god(s) exist. You can talk yourself into anything existing. Just because it exists in you mind, does not make it a fact in reality.





At least give us something that's not detectable by the five senses. You know, like god(s).





Now your turn, what's your empirical or logical evidence for god(s)?





You might find the following interesting...





Did the complexity of life arise spontaneously, or did it require a creator?





Christians believe that a creator is essential. Scientists believe that the idea of a "creator" is pure mythology, and that the complexity arose through natural processes like evolution. Who is right?





You can actually answer this question yourself with a little logic. Here are the two options:





1. The complexity of life and the universe did arise completely spontaneously and without any intelligence. Nature created all the complexity we see today.





2. An intelligent creator created all of the complexity that we see today because complexity requires intelligence to create it.





The advantage of the first option is that it is self-contained. The complexity arose spontaneously. No other explanation is required.





The problem with the second option is that it immediately creates an impossibility. If complexity cannot arise without intelligence, then we immediately must ask, "Who created the intelligent creator?" The creator could not spring into existence if complexity requires intelligence. Therefore, God is impossible.





In other words, by applying logic, we can prove that God is imaginary.
Reply:Man, those are some dam good answers. Makes me proud to be an Atheist.
Reply:Why should they bother? They are not telling you that you should worship one and give it control of your life.
Reply:Kum quat in your mouth
Reply:Yes, I can see them and I can show them to others.





Loquats taste better.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loquat
Reply:A logical proof is not necessary, as a physical proof exists.





Go to the supermarket. Find the little green fruit with the label "kumquat". Buy it, eat it, proven.
Reply:Yes. I have eaten one.
Reply:who tha hell is that
Reply:Partially from another's argument for the existence of something:





Kumquats exist because I exist and because I have a kumquat sitting in front of me that I can perceive and differentiate from other objects that are dissimilar from the kumquat.





This is based on the assumption that I exist. If you want to debate that, we have to go into the definition of existence. Because we define existence based on ourselves and our own perception, then I have to say that I exist.
Reply:YES ITS CALLED BIOLOGY ...scientists all agree to classify anything that shares certain characteristics a certain way... if a plant has those particular characteristics it is a kumquat. I can hold one .I can eat one. I can feel it. I can smell it to verify it actually exists. Gods,angels,demons, unicorns,aliens,ghosts etc also have a set of criteria to classify them ...however i have been unable to actually touch,smell,taste,run dna...etc to verify that they exist
Reply:Embrace the love of the kumquat, have faith in the kumquat's existence, and the kumquat will reveal itself to you in the fullness of time.





I love saying "kumquat."
Reply:One doesn't really need a logical proof to prove that kumquats exist. You need only visit the produce section of a local grocery store; you can touch it, taste it, smell it, see it and through reason come to the conclusion that it exists.
Reply:I see them, I touch them, I smell them, I taste them and that is all the proof I need. Why would someone who believes in god, who you can't see, need proof in something you can see?
Reply:if you are to not believe that something in front of you exists then how are you to believe that a being outside of this plane of existance is real.
Reply:YES!
Reply:What kind of logical proof would you like? If you subscribe to the Rene Descartes school of thought, then the answer is no, and beyond that in that school of thought I can't prove that you exist either. I can only know that I exist. However, logically, if you can pick it up, eat it, give it to someone else, etc... it exists. If you are an Existentialist, your line of thought might be something like this, did I will myself to pick up the kumquat, or did the kumquat will me to pick it up. As it is a physical object they would not argue its existence. If you read alot of Wittgenstein, you may want to gather all of your friends and see if they agree that the kumquat exists, as reality bends to the consensus of those observing it. I hope that helps.
Reply:Does someone doubt the existence of kumquats? If so, I would find one, or a photo of one and explain that that's what it is. If the person doubted that 'kumquat' was a word, I would show them a dictionary.





Your point would be.......?
Reply:I am not an atheist, but there is no proof, it is simply a fact. Any efforts to prove it are a waste of time and in fact diminish the fact of a kumquats existence.