RE: Street Epistemology - Practice
November 27, 2017 at 8:00 pm
(This post was last modified: November 27, 2017 at 8:01 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
Earlier in this thread, I made an argument for why evidence is necessarily physical.
Now, some of you may sense that excluding gods like that is kind of cheating . . . but my argument was nevertheless both sound and valid and, furthermore, it is IMO the theist who wants to speak of evidence of something "non-physical" that can both interact with the world and at the same time not be part of the world - and that we can somehow have evidence of the non-physical despite the fact that we are entirely physical beings who can only experience something as being evident to us physically - who is cheating.
Now, some of you may sense that excluding gods like that is kind of cheating . . . but my argument was nevertheless both sound and valid and, furthermore, it is IMO the theist who wants to speak of evidence of something "non-physical" that can both interact with the world and at the same time not be part of the world - and that we can somehow have evidence of the non-physical despite the fact that we are entirely physical beings who can only experience something as being evident to us physically - who is cheating.