What is wrong with this argument?
in [Logic]
|
Next: arithmetic in ZF
From: Incubus on 31 Mar 2005 11:15 Sweet Ol' Bob (SOB) wrote: > ... > This line of thinking solves the dilemna of Free Will. > ... There is no "dilemna [sic] of Free Will." Your so-called 'line of thinking' is nothing but the logical fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis. http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/List_of_fallacy_pages:A
From: RainLover on 31 Mar 2005 11:18 On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:55:24 -0600, Mike Oliver <mike_lists(a)verizon.net> wrote: >Sweet Ol' Bob (SOB) wrote: > >> It is not fair to compare Prophesy to works of people like Nostradamus >> or Casey. Those people operate in a different way from Prophesy. > ><spelling flame alert> >"Prophesy", pronounced to rhyme with "eye", is a verb, meaning >"to engage in prophecy". "Prophecy", which rhymes with "bee", >is a noun. There seem to be plenty of otherwise-well-educated >folks who don't know this, so I hope to be excused for pointing >it out. Do you think this is improper usage, or could this be an issue of American English VS Queen's English? I don't know... just asking, but those Brits DO like their 's's more than their c's or z's... Or so it seems to me. James, Seattle, Washington, USA, Earth
From: Hector Plasmic on 31 Mar 2005 12:26 > It is not fair to compare Prophesy to works of people > like Nostradamus or Casey. Why not? > Those people operate in a different way from Prophesy. How so? And please don't make the silly mistake of begging the question; if you'd like to claim that case x gets info from the gods and case y does not, please first establish the existence of gods to give out the info, or your claim adds no useful information and makes not meaningful distinction. > How about the prediction that the Jews would return to > the place of their original homeland? They've resettled the Tigris/Euphrates valley? Oh, I see -- we're allowed to interpret as we go along and make allowances for the fact that Jews always lived in those areas and still live in other areas, are we? Well, I predict that you will be unreasonable -- and deny that it often happens. :-)
From: Hector Plasmic on 31 Mar 2005 12:28 >> Indeed, he is merely using the word "God" in place >> of "existence." NOP. No useful information contained >> herein. > It enables him to both equivocate and obfuscate. Those are his only tools, after all. > It also gets in the way of discussion. Discussion is not his intent. (You know all this.)
From: SOB) on 31 Mar 2005 12:56
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:10:03 -0500, "Dan Listermann" <dan(a)listermann.com> wrote: >"God" is just a theory. That all depends on what you mean by "God". I would fully agree with you in most instances. But there is one instance where I do not agree with you, and that is Existential Metaphysics. There, the "God" is called the Supreme Being. This Being must exist, or nothing would exist. This God causes Existence. That is not a theory but a necessity. Unless of course you do not acknowledge Existence. But that's pretty hard to do because it results in a contradiction. But there are people who claim that reality is nothing but contradiction and that Order is an illusion. This is where I part company because I require that anyone who discusses this with me at least adopt the same Worldview as I have adopted - or else it is impossible to communicate. People like those described above are not Realists. They could never do productive Physics, which requires the Worldview of Existential Realism. They are Idealists of one sort who maintain that if there is any reality at all that it resides entirely in the mind. Plato and Descarte were prime examples of Idealists and so are all the Mystics who speak of reality as an illusion (except in their mind, of course). Atheism can only be experienced by people who are convinced that reality is subjective - that there is no objective reality. If there is an objective reality, then there must be a Supreme Being that causes it. -- Million Mom March For Gun Confiscation http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/mmm.html "If you build a man a fire and he will be warm for a day. If you set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life." |