(March 12, 2016 at 8:32 am)MysticKnight Wrote:(March 12, 2016 at 8:08 am)bennyboy Wrote: MK, I believe the expression you are looking for is "circular logic." And yes, this does seem to be a case of circular logic.
Double implications exist.
A -> B
B -> A
Therefore A <->B.
It's not circular reasoning. It's that both imply one another.
If there existed a child, there existed a parent.
If there existed a parent, there existed a child.
That's a double implication in the definition of child and parent.
The same can be true of morality because of it's relationship to God as the source.
Where there's shit, there must have been an ass, and that's another example of a thing with an exclusively known cause. Not so on morality, which can be just as easily a product of evolved, and sociable humans. Therefore, your argument stinks.
Mr. Hanky loves you!
