(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)
Do you take it on faith that there are no invisible purple unicorns prancing around you this very minute? Or that you are being screwed up the butt by beings from another universe who can make pleasure themselves without you realizing it? Or do you just assume these sorts of things aren't real because there is no evidence to support them?
If someone makes a truth claim to you, that there are invisible purple unicorn from another dimension screwing you in the ass right this minute, but you cannot feel it because they are outside our dimension, what would your response be?
“Eternity is a terrible thought. I mean, where's it going to end?”
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
