| Subject: Why don't we all just bow out? (except for Wade) |
Author:
Ben
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 04/20/02 4:34pm
In reply to:
Wade A. Tisthammer
's message, "Lol." on 04/18/02 1:50pm
>Okay, but do you any real evidential arguments against
>the starting premises? If not, then perhaps it's best
>to bow out (perhaps this time without the use of any
>tounge-in-cheek jokes).
Wade,
I have explained my side several times. If you choose not to find _my_ reasons for rejecting your arguments compelling, that is your decision, but I think all this sudden talk of "bowing out" is just useless. Although, I have no need to "bow out," I do think we should probably drop the subject of whether or not you have explained "why" God exists. You obviously think you have for reasons you have cited, and I obviously think you haven't for reasons I have cited. I don't find your reasons compelling, and you don't find mine compelling. Not finding your reasons compelling does not mean I am wrong or that I need to bow out, or vice versa. I am not asking you to bow out, and I would appreciate it if you would stop asking me to.
You ask for "evidential arguments" against your starting premises, which are simply philosophical premises. I do not agree with them, and I need not provide "evidence" for that, since you have provided no "evidence" for them in the first place. You are obviously taking some logic class, so we are all hearing you talk about logic now. Next semester, when you take calculus, we will probably all hear about calculus and how it proves the existence of God.
Although you took it as a joke, I think the whole elaborate thing about God "existing necessarily" is about as useful as me disagreeing with you because I necessarily disagree with you. The whole definition of a "greatest possible being" is subjective and strange, and the logical proof that follows it is built on that foundation. As I said before, I do not want to have a Logic 101 class here on the board, and that is my right. I do not have to "bow out" simply because I do not want to take an argument in a direction that I do not find useful.
Meanwhile, keep thinking you have the elusive "proof of God's existence" in your pocket if you like. If it's true, then I assume all logic professors believe in God, since they are bound to those rules that you listed.
Ben
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 