(January 6, 2012 at 12:16 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: You still did not get the point did you?
No evidence of X is not the same as X does not exist. You made the equation "No evidence for X = X does not exist". It is incorrect. That is what I responded to. You then wanted to argue that your equation is correct by bringing up Santa Claus as an example and the equation still is incorrect. "No evidence for Santa Claus" does not equate to "Santa Clause does not exist". There are other arguments you can make to make a case that Santa does not exist, but "No evidence for X = No X" is not it. It has nothing to do with whether or not I believe X to be real or not, or whether or not I know X to be real or not, it is simply a matter of your equation being incorrect.
You want to argue this pet peeve of yours go ahead, but if you are too stubborn to see the error in your reasoning, that is not philosophy's fault.
But we KNOW santa isn't real therefore philosobabble should stay the fuck away from it!
There is no need to argue that santa is not real, he isn't. The end. Or so it should be.
You are currently experiencing a lucky and very brief window of awareness, sandwiched in between two periods of timeless and utter nothingness. So why not make the most of it, and stop wasting your life away trying to convince other people that there is something else? The reality is obvious.
