What is wrong with this argument?
in [Logic]
|
Next: arithmetic in ZF
From: Gavan on 28 Mar 2005 03:38 "The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000(a)yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:<1111975793.166358.188970(a)z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>... > Gavan wrote: > > "The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000(a)yahoo.ca> > wrote in message > news:<1111947810.734473.144260(a)z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>... > > > Robibnikoff wrote: > > > > "The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000(a)yahoo.ca> > > > wrote in > > > > message > news:1111947083.810323.42640(a)g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > Desertphile, American Patriot wrote: > > > > >> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 15:49:52 GMT, MarkA > <manthony(a)stopspam.net> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:09:53 -0800, The great > > > > > philosopher-criminologist > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> >> What is wrong with saying that God [sic] works in > > > > >> >> Mysterious [sic] ways? > > > > >> > > > > >> > It presupposes the existence of God [sic]. Any evidence of > his > > > > >> > non-existence can be discounted as a "Mysterious way." > > > > >> > > > > >> The Easter Bunny did not leave any chocolate eggs for me this > > > > >> morning, but I'm sure many thousands of other kids and adults > got > > > > >> left chocolate eggs today--- why didn't I? The answer is "The > > > > >> Easter Bunny works in mysterious ways." > > > > > > > > > > actually, the answer is that you are not one of his elect. > > > > > > > > > > He only cares about his elect and no one else. > > > > > > > > Then he's a jerk. > > > > > > Oh, come on! In medieval times, Kings only cared about those > closest to > > > them. > > > > > > What exactly is the comparison you are trying to draw here? Are you > > saying that because greedy, despotic historical figures only catered > > for the chosen few we should accept that a fictitious rabbit didn't > > deliver chocolate eggs to all and sundry? > > Yes, because Cyril O'Reilly and Sister Peter Marie once said, "We don't > choose God. God chooses us." To do what? Perhaps fill in for the fictitious rabbit if he calls in sick?
From: Gavan on 28 Mar 2005 03:56 "The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000(a)yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:<1111967033.368785.207600(a)f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>... > Gavan wrote: > > "The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000(a)yahoo.ca> > wrote in message > news:<1111880705.429415.226920(a)f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>... > > > Denis Loubet wrote: > > > > "The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000(a)yahoo.ca> > > > wrote in > > > > message > news:1111874993.415822.226320(a)l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > What is wrong with saying that God works in Mysterious ways? > > > > > > > > Well, if it said to excuse the supposed actions of a god, then > the > > > one > > > > saying it is stating that they don't actually care what the god > they > > > believe > > > > in does, or what its motives are, they'll just worship it anyway. > > > > > > > > It's a big denial of personal responsibility. It's like saying > "I'll > > > follow > > > > that Hitler guy anywhere. I know he kills Jews, but I'm sure he > has > > > our best > > > > interests at heart." > > > > > > Well, for some people, as long as they are comforted, that is all > that > > > matters. > > > > How hypocritical that someone who espouses the virtues of an > > organisation that proclaims peace and love for all would now say that > > one's own comfort is all that matters. > > This is just in response to those that ask, "Why did God help you with > your success while he lets someone else in another part of the world > starve.?" > > I am just saying that some people say that if God wants to work like > that, then that is okay with them. This sort of attitudue would be in conflict with the teachings of almost all major religions wouldn't it?
From: Acme Diagnostics on 28 Mar 2005 06:32 "George Dance" <georgedance04(a)yahoo.ca> wrote: >The great philosopher-criminologist wrote: > >> What is wrong with saying that God works in Mysterious ways? > >Usually, what's wrong with it is that it's used as an ad hoc hypothesis >to make statements about God unfalsifiable. For example: > >C - "God loves people and is concerned for their welfare." >A - "He does? Then why did he let so many die in the tsunami?" >C - "He has His reasons. You and I wouldn't understand them. But all >the same, He loves people and is concerned for their welfare." >A - "Well, maybe he did have some reason for the tsunami. But he lets >little babies die every day, and there's no reason for that." >C - "Oh, He wouldn't let that happen without a reason, either. Again, >I couldn't possibly try to explain what those reasons are. But all the >same, He loves people and is concerned for their welfare." > >I hope you get the drift - all the evidence that there isn't a god that >loves people and cares for their welfare can be dismissed with the >'Mysterious Ways' argument; "There's a God that loves people and cares >for their welfare" is saved from being disproved, but at the cost of it >actually meaning or implying anything (as it's being true is compatible >with anything at all happening). > >As I see it, that's the point of the 'Mysterious Ways' argument, and >probably why a version of it is attributed to God Himself in Job 38-40. Agree, and would like to add that it's a really neat one because it is already inherent in an established belief, to wit: that there is a creator god as described in Chapt. 1 of the bible. That god logically and necessarily must work in mysterious ways some of the time on days when not being logically contradictory as required elsewhere. Then, any time you want to add a belief that He is concerned with people's welfare, the "mysterious ways" unfalsifiability device already exists. It's beautiful in its sheer simplicity! (quoting a recent rec.humor joke about some other equally nonsensical logic.) Larry
From: Hector Plasmic on 28 Mar 2005 08:47 > What is wrong with saying that God > works in Mysterious ways? It's equivalent to saying "I don't know if God works at all." After all, fairies work in mysterious ways.
From: The great philosopher-criminologist on 28 Mar 2005 09:13
Earle Jones wrote: > In article <1111975793.166358.188970(a)z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, > "The great philosopher-criminologist" <bedford_park2000(a)yahoo.ca> > wrote: > > > Gavan wrote: > > [...] > > > > What exactly is the comparison you are trying to draw here? Are you > > > saying that because greedy, despotic historical figures only catered > > > for the chosen few we should accept that a fictitious rabbit didn't > > > deliver chocolate eggs to all and sundry? > > > > Yes, because Cyril O'Reilly and Sister Peter Marie once said, "We don't > > choose God. God chooses us." > > * > Sister Peter? > > Now that's an interesting concept. www.hbo.com/oz/cast/character_reimondo.shtml |