(January 23, 2016 at 5:53 pm)phil-lndn Wrote:(January 23, 2016 at 5:43 pm)Aroura Wrote: His claim had caveats, "probably as sure as we need to be", it was not an absolute.
His claim for this was based on lack of evidence. And he offers this lack of evidence and many other reasons in his book. You just don't seem to like them.
The claim is not an absolute but it is still absolutely a truth claim because it says "probably".
That word has a very specific rational meaning. Use of the word requires supporting fact and reason to justify use of the word.
Since you seem to be defending it, can I take it that you are happy to take his claim on faith, without any sort of supporting fact and reason?
(January 23, 2016 at 5:45 pm)Rhythm Wrote: So do we pop a cork or just clap......?
False dichotomy (both, please)
Probably, is not a truth claim it just means as far as we can tell. Since there is no evidence of design or of designers for the universe, as far as we can tell there are none. Its not a matter of taking his claim on faith, all we have to do is look to the lack of evidence.
