(December 2, 2011 at 8:09 pm)Rhythm Wrote: You can certainly bitch and moan all you like, but "you cannot account for"....

I was not moaning, on the contrary I was pointing out my obvious victory.

Quote: You'd be dead broke if you made reasoning your business. If you want to succeed you have to pick something you have a talent for.

That’s funny considering I could have made a nice wage off of teaching you the difference between a logically valid and logically sound argument. So you are admitting you are even less talented at logic than I am?

(December 2, 2011 at 8:00 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: I find it interesting how you run away every time I have you pinned in a corner on something; you would have had to say, “The standard of a meter stick is a meter because it is a meter by definition.” This of course would be the same argument I used for the goodness of God that you thought was somehow logically fallacious.

The "meter" is an invented term to measure a length between two points. You could just as easily use "yards" or "quetroploxes" that they use on the planet Fnorb. Distance is objectively the same regardless of what measurement system you use.

Contrast with your claim about God and your unit of measure of "good". You can't prove your god exists nor can you offer any evidence to substantiate your claim that this god is the measure of goodness. At least I can present the yardstick.

Quote:So I will tally that as a win for me because I made you use the exact same argument you said I couldn’t use which of course would be special pleading.

I prefer to let the readers decide for themselves who made the better case. You can feel free to tally all the things you like in your own mind.

Quote:I get so tired of having to teach you the basics of logical reasoning...

I guess we are mutually tired of this exchange. I should have given up on trying to reason with you long ago.

Must be more "axioms" and presuppositions, lulz.

(December 2, 2011 at 8:28 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: The "meter" is an invented term to measure a length between two points. You could just as easily use "yards" or "quetroploxes" that they use on the planet Fnorb. Distance is objectively the same regardless of what measurement system you use.

Irrelevant, this does not answer the question how you know the standard for a meter stick is indeed a meter long?

Quote: Contrast with your claim about God and your unit of measure of "good". You can't prove your god exists nor can you offer any evidence to substantiate your claim that this god is the measure of goodness. At least I can present the yardstick.

I assure you that a yard-stick is not a meter long. I believe you granted the God of scripture’s existence for the purpose of our discussions did you not? Why are you going back on that now? Either way, now saying, “Well God does not even exist so meh!” has no bearing on whether the concept of the God of the Bible is in fact good or not. He is good because He is the standard by which all other goodness is measured just like the meter-stick standard is a meter because it is the standard by which all other meter-sticks are measured by.

Quote:I prefer to let the readers decide for themselves who made the better case. You can feel free to tally all the things you like in your own mind.

I figured you’d try to pull something like this since you know you are in an environment that is very friendly to you; however, the other readers’ opinions on the discussion have no bearing on who made the best logical arguments in the discussion. Now that will be 19.95 for teaching you yet something else you apparently didn’t know about logic…

Quote:I guess we are mutually tired of this exchange. I should have given up on trying to reason with you long ago.

Yeah, if that is what you call reasoning then you probably should have given up because it is certainly not valid logical reasoning.

Hey Stat, I didn't know you were looking for a way to "deal with" me btw. That's cute. I'm just making fun of you. Besides, I've told you how to deal with me every time we've ever disagreed on anything, provide evidence. You must have meant "I've been looking for a way to deal with you in the absence of evidence". Well, unfortunately, you probably won't be able to do that.

You keep blithering on about gods great goodness, but you can't show that god is good (regardless of whether or not you can show that he exists). God's little storybook keeps getting in the way. If you were to abandon the text entirely you might be able to get a little closer, but then you'd have bigger problems wouldn't you?

(December 2, 2011 at 8:44 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Irrelevant, this does not answer the question how you know the standard for a meter stick is indeed a meter long?

Because some dude named Pierre in France holds the master meter stick under armed SI guards. Once a day, they take it from it's posh leathery throne to a machine that uses the distilled broken dreams of orphans to broadcast to the entire Illuminati what constitutes a meter.

Now I have to kill you.

(December 2, 2011 at 8:46 pm)Rhythm Wrote: That's cute. I'm just making fun of you.

I know you are because an appeal to ridicule is irrational and you are an irrational person, I’d expect nothing less from you.

Quote: You keep blithering on about gods great goodness, but you can't show that god is good (regardless of whether or not you can show that he exists). God's little storybook keeps getting in the way. If you were to abandon the text entirely you might be able to get a little closer, but then you'd have bigger problems wouldn't you?

Good is the ultimate standard of goodness, it is absurd to even try and suggest He is not good.

(December 2, 2011 at 8:44 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Irrelevant, this does not answer the question how you know the standard for a meter stick is indeed a meter long?

Yes, it does. I said the "meter" is an invented term that we've all agreed on to communicate and measure distance. We could just as easily use a different measurement.

This is apples and oranges with your claim that an imaginary character is a measure of what is good without any explanation as to how that works.

Quote:I assure you that a yard-stick is not a meter long.

But physical distance is the same whether it is measure in yards or meters. Distance doesn't get shorter when you switch units of measure.

Quote:[Yahweh] is good because He is the standard by which all other goodness is measured just like the meter-stick standard is a meter because it is the standard by which all other meter-sticks are measured by.

Says who? What is this assertion based on? How can we use Yahweh to measure goodness in some practical and consistent way? By this, I mean you will make the same measurement that I would. Someone else should be able to repeat the experiment and come to the exact same conclusion.

Given that there are thousands of different Christian denominations, I highly doubt it.

Quote:I figured you’d try to pull something like this since you know you are in an environment that is very friendly to you; however, the other readers’ opinions on the discussion have no bearing on who made the best logical arguments in the discussion.

Others who don't post here can also judge for themselves. It may surprise you but nobody has appointed you the final arbiter of who won every debate.

Quote:Yeah, if that is what you call reasoning then you probably should have given up because it is certainly not valid logical reasoning.

I think I already said, "you just go on believing that".

Reductio ad absurdum. Google it, and then we'll talk about who ought to be doling out the cash ( I hear wiki has an entry on this). I'm seriously considering buying a sword, and etching that on the blade.

(December 2, 2011 at 9:00 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Yes, it does. I said the "meter" is an invented term that we've all agreed on to communicate and measure distance. We could just as easily use a different measurement.

Again, your point is irrelevant, “good” is just a term to describe God’s actions, we could have described them in some other language.

Quote: This is apples and oranges with your claim that an imaginary character is a measure of what is good without any explanation as to how that works.

It works just like the meter stick, that’s the point; in order to avoid an infinite regression of standards an ultimate standard must be invoked. God is the ultimate standard for goodness, Truth, justice, power, and so on. So to ask how you know an ultimate standard is indeed what it is an ultimate standard for (i.e. God and goodness, meter sticks and meters) is absurd and logically incoherent.

Quote:But physical distance is the same whether it is measure in yards or meters. Distance doesn't get shorter when you switch units of measure.

We are talking about the standards for those units of measures.

Quote:[
Says who? What is this assertion based on? How can we use Yahweh to measure goodness in some practical and consistent way? By this, I mean you will make the same measurement that I would. Someone else should be able to repeat the experiment and come to the exact same conclusion.

People can and often do. God cannot lie because it is contrary to His character, therefore we can deduce that it is evil to lie. If we lie, we are acting in a way that falls short of God’s moral character and therefore are acting in a way that is falling short of goodness.

Quote: Given that there are thousands of different Christian denominations, I highly doubt it.

Yet, they all use the same Bible, sounds like a problem with the thousands of different people, not the Bible itself.

Quote:Others who don't post here can also judge for themselves. It may surprise you but nobody has appointed you the final arbiter of who won every debate.

Logic is the final arbiter, people’s opinions are irrelevant.

---

(December 2, 2011 at 9:05 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Reductio ad absurdum. Google it, and then we'll talk about who ought to be doling out the cash ( I hear wiki has an entry on this). I'm seriously considering buying a sword, and etching that on the blade.

Since you are now claiming to be a logician, then you should know that reducing an argument to absurdity is not the same thing as appealing to ridicule. You have to actually use logical demonstration to reduce an argument to absurdity, not just laugh at it.