(September 5, 2009 at 1:46 pm)Retorth Wrote: Alright, thank you for your response. I respect that, by the way. At least you're open about it—or so you say, anyways. Good on ya!

Yes, well, I do not merely say so. But your cynicism on that score is duly noted.

(September 5, 2009 at 1:23 pm)Arcanus Wrote:

(September 5, 2009 at 1:12 pm)Retorth Wrote: So with that said, you agree there is a chance your mind could be changed and a chance you'll become an atheist?

At some point in the "Conversion" thread someone asked what it would take for people to change their minds. A few people responded, including myself.

So that the TAG argument has been repeatedly pointed out to have flaws and that the claimed fallacies in those arguments are largely of your own imagining isn't sufficient?

Kyu

(September 5, 2009 at 1:55 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: So that the TAG argument has been repeatedly pointed out to have flaws, and that the claimed fallacies in those arguments are largely of your own imagining, isn't sufficient?

My imagination does not determine what is and isn't a fallacy. Logic does. If I identify a fallacy and explain how it was committed, and you disagree with my assessment, feel free to do so—but on logical grounds, if you please. I will respond to your critiques, by either refuting it or conceding to it—on logical grounds.

(September 5, 2009 at 2:03 pm)Arcanus Wrote:

(September 5, 2009 at 1:55 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: So that the TAG argument has been repeatedly pointed out to have flaws, and that the claimed fallacies in those arguments are largely of your own imagining, isn't sufficient?

My imagination does not determine what is and isn't a fallacy. Logic does. If I identify a fallacy and explain how it was committed, and you disagree with my assessment, feel free to do so—but on logical grounds, if you please. I will respond to your critiques, by either refuting it or conceding to it—on logical grounds

And in my experience all you theists do EXACTLY that ... the fallacies in opposing arguments that you see are in your heads and ARE NOT based on logic.

Kyu

(September 5, 2009 at 1:53 pm)Arcanus Wrote: Yes, well, I do not merely say so. But your cynicism on that score is duly noted.

How was I being cynical? I do not even know you, and neither do you me. I merely wanted a straight answer so I asked, is all. Nothing more then a mere question. lol


In any case, I was being sincere when I thanked you.

(September 5, 2009 at 2:06 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: And in my experience, all you theists do EXACTLY that. The fallacies you see in opposing arguments are in your heads and ARE NOT based on logic.

Like I said, feel free to make your case on logical grounds if you think I have done that somewhere. I will respond, likewise on logical grounds.

---

(September 5, 2009 at 2:08 pm)Retorth Wrote: How was I being cynical? I do not even know you, and neither do you me.

I detected implicit cynicism in "or so you say, anyways." And only there; i.e., the rest of your post struck me as sincere. And thank you.

(September 5, 2009 at 2:11 pm)Arcanus Wrote: I detected implicit cynicism in "or so you say, anyways." And only there; i.e., the rest of your post struck me as sincere. And thank you.

Well I apologize for the misunderstanding there.

(September 5, 2009 at 2:11 pm)Arcanus Wrote:

(September 5, 2009 at 2:06 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: And in my experience, all you theists do EXACTLY that. The fallacies you see in opposing arguments are in your heads and ARE NOT based on logic.

Like I said, feel free to make your case on logical grounds if you think I have done that somewhere. I will respond, likewise on logical grounds.

And that's exactly my point ... I DO make my case only to be accused WRONGLY of fallacy.

Kyu

(September 6, 2009 at 7:44 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: That's exactly my point—I DO make my case, only to be accused WRONGLY of fallacy.

I have pointed out the fallacies in the arguments thus far presented against the TAG, which you said only exist in my imagination. Since it is logic, not my imagination, that determines what is and isn't a fallacy, I invited you to disagree with my assessment on logical grounds. Take some fallacy I identified and, using logic, demonstrate how it is not actually that fallacy.

(September 6, 2009 at 8:58 pm)Arcanus Wrote:

(September 6, 2009 at 7:44 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: That's exactly my point—I DO make my case, only to be accused WRONGLY of fallacy.

I have pointed out the fallacies in the arguments thus far presented against the TAG, which you said only exist in my imagination. Since it is logic, not my imagination, that determines what is and isn't a fallacy, I invited you to disagree with my assessment on logical grounds. Take some fallacy I identified and, using logic, demonstrate how it is not actually that fallacy.

Don't tell me how to frame my opinion of you! I will respond to you in my own good time and in the way I choose to debate.

IMO it is you theists that are masters of fallacy and typically, when accused in return it is on the basis of some clever verbal trickery.

Kyu