Hmm, that's an interesting philosophy, but i wonder... Can you Prove it? I mean...

>Hmm, that's an interesting philosophy, but i wonder... Can you Prove it? I mean, do you have any proof of your assertions? Can you provide any proof AT ALL of your beliefs?
>w-what do you mean prove it man, like we can't know nothing...
And thus the philosopher gets BTFO. It's so easy! Just ask them the magical two words: Prove It! and see how they recoil, see how injured they are "i've been found out". Charlatans!

Attached: 0eeb9.jpg (400x400, 43K)

>mfw I simply respond, "I may not be able to prove it, but can you disprove it?"

Attached: 1529426195194.jpg (800x640, 108K)

prove it! prove that this will actually BTFO them and not make them present the proof.

Any proof presupposes a set of axioms which cannot be proven but are simply taken as true.

Proof? Suppose that wasn't the case. Any proposition would be derived from any simpler propositions which itself must be derived from even simpler propositions. If there were no axioms on which those propositions ultimately rely any proposition must be the result of infinitely many derivations of earlier propositions. That is, any proposition by means of elementary logics is infinitely complex which is absurd.

>Any proof presupposes a set of axioms which cannot be proven but are simply taken as true.
user, i...

Prove it.

Attached: 242-2423977_view-samegoogleiqdbsaucenao-blurry-punch-pepe-pepe-the-frog.jpg (820x814, 122K)

even if everything provable were to be proven, the problems of life have still not been touched at all

>Prove it.
No

btfo, OP correct again

I already gave a preliminary proof to the above statement in the comment. Obviously you can question that too by claiming that its underlying assumptions must also be proven. There are however only two such assumptions. First, that such a thing like a proof exists and secondly, that there are no infinitely complex things.

yfw anti-philosophism is a philosophy

Attached: 438767536b9d06e90400e88ab228b83bd7.jpg (352x436, 113K)

Prove it

Before anyone sets out to "prove" themselves, it'd be best to ascertain what circumstances would be acceptable as "proof" by the person demanding it.

Otherwise, it's futile.

If you will listen

Attached: 1258.jpg (400x600, 36K)

but can you prove proof itself?

a spectre is haunting /it/

Attached: shestov_060612_620px.jpg (620x416, 71K)

Prove you aren't a massive faggot.

prove it

This. For this reason, faith matters far more than what is referred to as truth.

Ever hear of Gödel? 'Proof' itself is impossible to prove. So your argument is incorrect.

Moreover, trying to disprove something is the common way to ‚prove‘ it.
>critical rationalism
Look that up OP

>WAAAAAAAAA STOP USING LANGUAGE
>AAAAAAAA THEN JUST STOP USING OLD LANGUAGE
>IEIEEEEEEIEIIIIIEIEEEIEECEIHHCCH JUST STOP DOING PHILOSOPHY
>AAAAAWWWAAAAHAHAHAAAAAA WHY DO HIPSTERS LIKE ELEMENTALISM AND WHY DOES 99% OF THE POPULATION BELIEVE IN SOULS EXCEPT FOR MARXIST PSYCHOLOGIST
>WAAAAAAWWAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAAWAWWAWAWWAWAWAW SCIEEEEEEEEEEEENCE THE CULT OF SCIENCE IS DIFFERENT ITS ITSELF UNIQUE THERE AREN'T SYSTEMS IT DEFINES ITSELF ITS JUST FACTS ARE FACTS ARE FACTS ITS SYMBOLIC ORDER OF NATURE OF NATURE OF NATURE OF NATURE OF NATURE OBJECTIVE I-SELF CONTRACTION OF INDRA'S NET OF A = A I'VE NEVER READ A BOOK IN MY LIFE AAAAJSDHASHGDSAJHGD
>JUSTIFICATION IS JUSTIFICATION JUSTIFICATION IS A HYPNAGOGIC NON DISCURSIVE SPATIALITY CANNNNNNOTT BE REFUTED IN ETERNITY
HE WHO LIVES DOES NOT LOVE AND HE WHO LOVES DOES NOT LIVE YOU GRANDIOTIMANTISTIC FAGGOT

Different thing are proven in different ways.The fact that idiot got boxed into empiricism to justify his position is his fault.
Even now you are taking logic for granted whidout proving it in any way. And thons of other things like the existence of the self the fact that we retain information over time and so on.